It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
In the second part of the game you have to solve the puzzle in which you pull books in certain order. The rules are as follows
1)Don't start by pulling out red book one.
2)Blue books should be pulled out in numerical order.
3)Blue book II should be pulled out after two red books have been
pulled.
4)Red book III should be pulled out immediately after red book I.
5)Half of the blue book pulls are immediately followed by a red book
pull.
6)Neither red book III nor red book IV is the last red book to be
pulled.
7)The last blue book should be pulled immediately after all red
books have been pulled.
After some thinking I came to a solution which abides to all rules, but it did not work. I googled the solution, and it was
Blue 1 Red 1 Red 3 Blue 2 Blue 3 Red 4 Red 2 Blue 4
But in this solution Blue 3 goes right after Blue 2 which directly contradicts rule 5!
Game, what the hell?!
Do I miss something?
The hints are fine. I also did the puzzle this morning.

Regarding rule 5)
- Blue 1 is followed by Red 1.
- Blue 3 is followed by Red 4.
- Blue 2 is not followed by Red.
- Blue 4 is not followed by Red.

Therefore in 50% of the cases, blue is followed by red, which is exactly as stated in rule 5
avatar
MrMuggles: The hints are fine. I also did the puzzle this morning.

Regarding rule 5)
- Blue 1 is followed by Red 1.
- Blue 3 is followed by Red 4.
- Blue 2 is not followed by Red.
- Blue 4 is not followed by Red.

Therefore in 50% of the cases, blue is followed by red, which is exactly as stated in rule 5
I've read it as after 50% of blue books (i.e 2) are pulled, red one should be pulled.
It would be nice if language was more clear
And I just thank you for the tip. Really confused in one place
avatar
dmonkoff: I've read it as after 50% of blue books (i.e 2) are pulled, red one should be pulled.
It would be nice if language was more clear
I was making exactly the same mistake, but then I realised, there must be something wrong in my reasoning. I thought there had to be some ambiguity in what was said, some expression that could be interpreted in a different way than I was doing, since I was doing it wrong; and, after a good deal of thinking, I finally found the solution. So, in the end, I think the lack of clearness, the equivocality, is just part of the parcel - it's supposed to be a riddle, after all.
But then, since I'm from Italy and you're from Finland, I cannot help but wonder if this ambiguity is as much sensible for an Anglophone; I wonder how a native English-speaker might perceive the sentence, and if he could be tricked in the same way, or not.

PS
At one point, I even thought about pulling blue books in decreasing order, 4 3 2 1 - that's a "numerical order" as much as 1 2 3 4, after all... I was utterly convinced that that must be the solution, and was very disappointed when I found out it wasn't - but it could have been!