1 Difficulty is an architecture property
It’s not the number of givens but where they sit and which techniques they force. Identical clue counts can yield wildly different paths—from simple singles to XY-Wing and chains.
Beyond number filling: 12 seldom-told truths about uniqueness vs. explainability, clue design, chain reasoning, and why tidy notes beat raw speed.
clue architecture • uniqueness • candidate notes • chain reasoning • human-centric flow
It’s not the number of givens but where they sit and which techniques they force. Identical clue counts can yield wildly different paths—from simple singles to XY-Wing and chains.
Uniqueness can be machine-checked; human flow requires curated step sequences. Great editors test for both.
Updating candidates after every placement prevents error cascades and speeds you up more than any “speed trick”.
Quality comes from interaction, not quotas. A sparse but well-designed grid can flow better than a crowded, messy one.
Pretty layouts don’t raise difficulty; required technique depth does.
Focus on dense units and low-candidate cells—your most reliable board unlock.
“If A then not B” eliminates candidates with logic and pushes the grid toward uniqueness.
Fast times emerge from tidy notes and fewer backtracks—not from rushing.
The same 9×9 can teach singles to beginners and UR/Swordfish to experts—one genre, many lessons.
Search trees find answers; players crave explanations. Hence human-centric design matters.
Diagonal, Killer, Thermo, Kropki add constraints that improve classic placement skills.
After every placement, clean candidates in its row, column and box immediately to spark cascades.
Practice these truths with daily grids on Ozerlyn Sudoku.