Puzzle No. 27 : Tapa-Slalom hybrid

I’m gonna bore you now with an interesting story. I was chatting today with Deb Mohanty, and asked him to pick a number 1,2,3. 1 was a nothing-fancy-Slitherlink, 2 was some variation, 3 was this. He picked 3 and then I told him that it was for the puzzle to post here today. He then moved to another topic and asked me if I have any Tapa ideas. I found this funny, decided not to tell him and let him see for himself 😛 Although, like I told him, I don’t remember which variations have already been done, so I don’t know if this one already exists. Ah well, story done, on to the puzzle.

This is a TapaSlalom hybrid. The non-gate and non-circled numbers are Tapa clues which guide you to form a Tapa wall which also follows the rules of a closed Slalom loop, moving through the gates in order.  Therefore there cannot be bits of the wall that are not strictly part of the loop, the loop can touch itself diagonally.

Here’s an example and its only solution to better illustrate this(well, either 4 can be a “?” and still have the same solution) :








Rated : Easy I think. Solution here. Password – TS.


Puzzle No. 27

6 comments on “Puzzle No. 27 : Tapa-Slalom hybrid

  1. I think the 3-2 clue under the 2-gate should be a 2-2 as otherwise it’s not unique.

    It feels more like a snake than a Tapa, through the no touching rule. It’s a rule that neither slalom or tapa has. A lot of the no touching could a resolved through the no 2×2 squares that tapa uses, but not all of them.

    • You’re right, that was supposed to be a 2-2. Copy pasted 3s all around, forgot to change one of those. I’ll change it soon.

      I don’t think I’ve mentioned a “no-touching” rule. The whole thing can be solved using a combination of the no 2×2 of Tapa and the fact that Slalom has a single continous loop, if you consider the line segments of the loop as the Tapa wall cells. Here’s what I mean, the “Slalom” version of the example you could say : http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7026/6772285535_45354aa55e_m.jpg

      Anyway, I was actually fiddling with the idea of just letting the Tapa wall be and not the loop rule, but decided on the loop rule in the end. I agree that that could make for a good variation too. Probably next time.

  2. Sorry, but without the loop can’t touch itself by a side it’s not unique. I somewhat assumed that rule from the fact you said the loop can touch itself diagonally, and it having to be unique. Check for example the top rows between the 2 gates. The wall could make a U-turn downwards there, without breaking the tapa no 2×2 rule. The same thing can happen between the 6 and 4 clue where the wall could make a small turn touching the 7 bit, without breaking the 2×2 rule.

    • Well, for this one, my rule about considering the Wall cells as segments of the loop means that the possibilities you say will make the loop go something like this : http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7005/6781465337_1820e5609b.jpg
      Probably should’ve illustrated that better in the example.

      And you’re right that I could’ve done without that, but TBH, I wasn’t really sure I could pull this off in the first place since I haven’t even created a Slalom until now, neither have I done a classic Tapa! I need to work on getting some confidence in my own ability 😛 Will surely remove that restriction next time.

    • If I don’t do that, the solution is visible for anyone who visits the blog. By making it password protected, someone who wants to come and solve without seeing the solution can do so easily, at the same time solution is available for those who do want to check.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s