You need to place poker hands into the rows and columns of the square grid. Cards in the yellow cells should have the same suit, while cards in the white cells should have different suits.Solution - https://wondrousnet.blogspot.com/2026/07/solution-to-5-card-stud-puzzle.html
i don't understand. why are there two cards per square? poker hands are five cards, not 10. take the center row for example. you cannot simultaneously have pair of 4s and two pair
>>17023396This is because the left/lower triangles in each square are reserved for the left and lower hands and the right/upper triangles are reserved for the right and upper hands.
>>17023385this is just sudoku
>>17024482This is just a fill-in puzzle. It has some similarities with sudoku. But this is interesting that some specific information from poker need to be used to solve it. Using one logic is not enough.
>>17023385O'm sorry but the instructions are incomprehensible. >You need to place poker hands into the rows and columns of the square grid. Where exactly do the hands go? You give two hands for each row and column, with no explanation of what it means. >Cards in the yellow cells should have the same suit,The same suit as what???
>>17024608Actually you have two grids there that directly don't connected to each other. The first grid is consisted of the left/lower triangles of each square and it meant for the left and lower hands. The second grid is consisted of the right/upper triangles of the each square and it meant for the right and upper hands. The only connection between these grids is that you have only one set of cards, so you can't place one card to the both grids. So you need to place one card to the each triangle of the each square. And according to color of the square those cards should have the same suit or different suits.
>>17023450>This is because the left/lower triangles in each square are reserved for the left and lower handsThis is an important piece of the puzzle that was never fucking communicated. I wasted three god damn hours looking at this and assuming, generally, that either the lower or upper can correspond to the left or right. Fuck you.
>>17024630>you have only one set of cards,Wow. Another piece of valuable information not communicated. What kind of braindead fucking idiot came up with this? It's a cool puzzle when you know all the information. The creator probably chooses not to share such critically important information because giving "hints" ruins the puzzle. What a piece of shit. And fuck you too for not communicating this in your OP, braindead faggot.
>>17024689May be this is a standard notation for the similar fill-in puzzles, and the author has assumed that potential solvers are familiar with it.In the actual pdf from the game no other information was given.https://web.archive.org/web/20171012052333/http://www.ms.unimelb.edu.au/~mums/puzzlehunt/2015/puzzles/2.3_5-Card_Stud.pdf
Fun puzzle
>>17026629Congratulations! Yes, it requires some logic and some knowledge of poker. It's a good combination. By the way, there is another original logic puzzle from the same author - https://wondrousnet.blogspot.com/2025/04/solution-to-puzzle-parallel-dimensions.html
>>17023385nice
>>17027744There're a lot of good original logic puzzles from the univeristy quests, with various difficulty.There's another one, where you need to place tokens of differen shape and color on the given grids. This puzzle is much harder.Puzzle.https://web.archive.org/web/20120403134544/http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/ub/sums/puzzlehunt/2010/puzzles/A5S4_Characterisation.pdfSolution.https://web.archive.org/web/20120403133946/http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/ub/sums/puzzlehunt/2010/solutions/A5S4_Characterisation.html
>>17024688>This is an important piece of the puzzle that was never fucking communicated. I wasted three god damn hours looking at this and assuming, generally, that either the lower or upper can correspond to the left or right. Fuck you.I'm kinda with you on this one, but only partially, because I still blame you for spending time on this shit at all. hear my wisdom: I assume any puzzle posted here is either a) flat-out unsolvable because for some degenerates that's the epitome of trolling, or b) badly communicated, either due to retardation from the part of the poster or because he is angling for an opportunity to call you a retard for not knowing the ommitted part.
>>17029249You're right. It was my own fault. I don't think the omissions are malicious. I think they genuinely don't know how to communicate, nor understand what others are likely to assume. In other words, they're fucking idiots while jerking off to solving puzzles, the rules of which only they understand.
>>17029271That's basically just how quests work. You have very little instructions and sometimes no instructions at all, so you need to figure out rules yourself, that's the part of the task.
