alanr555 wrote:The outcome would be obvious using the "Mandatory Pairs"
method - and resolved probably much earlier!
The digits '8' in row 8 in the candidate profile would instead be a
mandatory pair of 8's in region 8 (which encloses cols 456 of row 8)...."
Hi Alan,
I'm not familiar with some of your terminology. Could you please explain what "Mandatory Pairs" means?
Considering only row 8, candidates 2,8 & 9 form a naked triple but candidates 8 & 9 in columns 5 & 6 cannot be a 'hidden' pair. Unless I'm mistaken, you seem to conclude that candidate 8 cannot occupy column 2 without any prior elimination technique such as "Locked Candidates(1) as referred to in my above post. If this is so how do you reach your conclusion?
Cec