Forget it, I think I was wrong anyway
But I did not put the letters I intended - because they appeared in a different order. Might be worth noting for future.

Man that was intense. It had my heart going the whole time... Thanks so much Deb. I'm pretty bummed, on the two I missed... LMI count I started to double count, and told myself 'you've never counted this type wrong, just get the bonus' ... go figure hah. And on Images count, I forgot that reflection was allowed!! Man, so close. I think if the example had a mirrored one I would have remembered. Oh well, so much fun. Thanks again to this site for having so much puzzle competitions. It seems so hard to believe now that just a few months ago I was having to wait a year at a time between the USPC. Thanks again LMI!!

Oh! One other thing... for next time, if there is any chance we could have just 30 more seconds in the review period.... I think I could've gotten two or three more answers with just another half minute heh...

Deb, Rohan: Great Screen test, thanks!

There were lot of puzzles in this test I left almost finished (for example with only 2 possible answers to decide) and I had to deal with them in the review period (~10 of these puzzles but managed to submit only 3)
I believe top solvers will be able to solve all puzzles in time limit, but I also think lot of people could find these puzzles too hard and given time is not enough for them.

So if we have bonus points for earlier sumbission, I think we can let competitors solve also after time limit of each puzzle for chance to get points for later submission (with points value decreasing 1point for each second after time limit)

Do you think it is good idea or do you like current system more?

It was a mistake on our part not to have reflection in the example image.

Not sure if/when ST#2 will happen.
We'll definitely review all the inputs from the forum.

In fact we had a longer list of feedback questions. One of the question was how long the Review Period should be.

So - request everyone to put any other specific feedback they have.

I would comment about the puzzle difficulties after the test.

But you have a nice idea of 'decreasing 1 point'. We are very likely to implement this or something similar, if/when we've ST2.

It is not that we like the current system. It is not that the current system is perfect.
This is first-ever Screen Test at LMI, and with inputs/feedbacks from everyone, I hope that we can improve it.

It is a miss.
It is best to have the example and the puzzle exactly labeled to avoid any confusion, especially given the short nature of the test.

Thanks Gotroch. Like Deb mentioned, since this is the first ST, we were not sure how good the timings decided will be. We will surely work upon players' feedback and (hopefully) organise a better ST in future (with changes).
We'll probably start some polls regarding the timings, format, etc.

I'm glad you enjoyed :-)

I am not able to login to take ST1 test. It always displays my brother's result (who has taken this test couple of hours back).
I tried deleting cache and restarting laptop but it does not help.
I am able to post this message with my ID but strangely if I click on ST1 link it does not give me option to type my credentials.

Murali...

Check your inbox for alternate link

Brilliant puzzles,
just a suggestion, if we answer ealier that 60 seconds in any puzzle , that time should be allowed to use in other puzzles before 90 sec review,
might even out strenghts in different type of puzzles

Similar to Neeraj's suggestion.
I'm not sure if we should do this. Because 'the order in which the puzzles appear' would affect players' performance.

most importantly, any amount of seconds saved for a puzzle is being converted to bonus points... so it doesnt serve a purpose giving a bonus for seconds saved and then carrying the time forward to next puzzle...

agreed that bonus pts takes care of fast solving, i would prefer using that time in solvinhg other puzzles where i m not that quick, eg i cld solve the sudoku puzzles quickly but need more than avg time for the loops ,
thats my take, but i understand what we intend to test is also important, if we want to test time solving, or ability to solve all kinds of puzzle

Edited by utkaarsh 2010-12-06 8:10 PM

For Screen Test 1, we stuck to the format in which screen tests take place at WPCs. We added the 90-sec review period so that more puzzles can be solved by players and also to motivate new-comers and first-timers.

We will work upon all the feedback we get to improve in future.

As for your suggestion, if the saved time is again given back to you to solve any puzzle you want, it just transforms it into a direct 30-min normal test with 25 puzzles. Say for example a player doesnt like Arrows, she/he will just skip that puzzle and use those 60 secs to solve some other puzzle, which is not the idea of a screen test.

After an exciting weekend of the short-and-quick format of the puzzle world, with a high participation of 183 players from 35 countries, we announce the winners and players with outstanding performance:

1st Martin Merker (Germany) - 1477
2nd Thomas Snyder (USA) - 1450
3rd Hideaki Jo (Japan) - 1394

View complete results: http://logicmastersindia.com/ST/ST1/score.asp

Congrats to Martin Merker for winning Screen Test 1 and for scoring 1477 points . Congrats to Thomas Snyder and Hideaki Jo for finishing 2nd and 3rd respectively.
Special thanks to Rishi Puri, Ritesh Gupta, Rajesh Kumar, Rakesh Rai and Tejal Phatak for solving and testing the interface of ST beforehand and to ensure a smooth weekend.

Please give your feedbacks and comments so that we can work on it for future STs. Hoping to see you all at ST2.

Regards,
Rohan Rao and Deb Mohanty.

I submited all the answers but only 2 was counted... Did I start too late?

Check other thread.

I participated in LMI Tests after a long time, was a bit rusty as the performance suggests.

Generally, the answers I submit are quite accurate. But this time I got 7 right and 7 wrong. Certainly, because of the time constraint associated with individual puzzles.

Overall, Screen Test is a great concept, as it requires the individual to solve each and every puzzle. As the whole test was based on WPC Style, I would suggest not to modify it further. But one thing that I would like is more time for all the individual puzzles in the next Screen Test.

Yes, we will probably have more time for each puzzle next time to enable more players to be able to solve the puzzles.

I have written about my Screen Test experience on my blog: http://rohanrao.blogspot.com/2010/11/logic-masters-india-screen-tes...

I fully agree with the latest comments, particulalry those of Rohan and adityasaraf. The ST perhaps needs adjustments but too many changes will result in making its nature completely different from WPC. I found it very demanding and fully enjoyable.
The statistics show that in the majority of the cases, the puzzles were well chosen and solvable on screen. The exceptions being the few cases in which the very low percentage of correct solution indicate a random distribution (=guesswork)
As an improvement, I would recommend a more visible time marker. (perhaps 5 beeps in the last 5 seconds??)
Stefano

Good idea. We can easily do something with the timer in the last 5 seconds to catch the eye of the participant. Maybe beep. Maybe changing colour or making bigger, since not all computers may have sound system in place.
Having a more visible timer during the entire session might be distracting to players. We wanted players to see the puzzle and solve it as quickly as possible rather than concentrating on the time left. Thats why we tried to camouflage the timer in the background. But we'll surely look into it if more people suggest a better timer :-)

I'm glad you enjoyed the Screen Test :-)

While we have got bigger green bars for most of the questions, we have got bigger orange / red bar for the question "Were most of the puzzles solvable on screen?"

See here for details.

That obviously means that while players liked the concept and interface, but the main area of improvement is puzzles.
In next few posts, I would cover my thoughts on the Screen Test puzzles.

To start with KnightSafe, Mazes, BeadCount
All three of them visual puzzles. Most players got them right. Mazes being the easiest one, I wanted mazes to be first puzzle in the test. But Rohan thought it might disable players' eyes if it the first puzzle :-)
Either way, I think all 3 puzzles were solvable easily on screen. They all have high percentages of success rate too.

The next 2 are Minimum Mines and Blank Hitori, both needing mild logical steps.
I had planned for a bigger Minimum Mines - an 8X8 one - but I'm glad that we didn't include it.
The 5X5 one needs minor additions, and many players cracked it in less than 30 seconds.
Blank Hitori - It had lot of "black" squares. Many players got it right, but few players answers 2 or 4.
I believe that these 2 puzzles are nice selections for the screen test.

The next two - CellSudoku and SudokuTwins
CellSudoku - One of the few puzzles where we probably didn't get it right.
We wanted a visual sudoku, and not a sudoku with standard solving approach with pencil marks etc.
It is a very simple puzzle, needing a two step approach. See spoiler below.

But given that only few players got it correct - we should have a smaller grid or more time for this puzzle.

SudokuTwins -
Unfortunately, grid A has two solutions because of a misplaced digit. Although the puzzle as a whole had single solution, it definitely pissed off many players.
And also, the labels were different between grids B and C.
I'm to be blamed for the mess in this puzzle.

While we wanted to have both the Sudokus easy and accessible to everyone, it didn't turn out that way.
This is one of my biggest disappointments in ST1.