This past fall, my dad and I collaborated on this puzzle (embedded below) and submitted it to the New York Times.
We were rejected, obviously – otherwise I wouldn’t be posting it here! – but the specific way we were rejected was a first for me, and elicited some particular emotions…
Our puzzle: https://crosshare.org/crosswords/2jmBAlR08qV5m1rlZjBM/higher-education
Spoilers:
New York Times: Thursday, January 8, 2026 by Mallory Montgomery and Zhou Zhang
The Puzzle in Question
The NYT puzzle (as well as ours) is centered around the phrase GRADE INFLATION. In the published version, the “inflated” letters turning the themers into new entries that are unrelated to the clues.
Revealer
- 39a: [College concern seen in 16-, 25-, 49- and 63-Across?] – GRADE INFLATION
Themers
- 16a: [Nonverbal “well done”] – HIGH DIVE (rather than HIGH FIVE; F→D)
- 25a: [Cars with retractable roofs] – CROP TOPS (rather than DROP TOPS; D→C)
- 49a: [Accidentally burn, perhaps] – OVERBOOK (rather than OVERCOOK; C→B)
- 63a: [Results of wearing some uncomfortable shoes] – A-LISTERS (rather than BLISTERS; B→A)
I assume you noticed the similarities between this puzzle and ours (at the beginning of this post)? Unbeknownst to us when we submitted our puzzle, the NYT already had this other puzzle in the queue for publication. Which is why in November, they wrote the following:
“Sadly, we have decided to pass on this one. This is a cute concept, but unfortunately we recently accepted another puzzle with the very same theme. Great minds think alike!”
Reflections on Getting “Scooped”
In a way, this puzzle was a kind of a relief to finally solve. It had been 3 months since we received that rejection, and I’d been anxious to solve the alluded-to puzzle ever since. So there was a certain sense of closure from all of this (albeit in a similar way to getting a final bill for a car repair).
Though, I won’t pretend that I wasn’t disappointed. Because on the one hand, the published puzzle is truly a well-made crossword (and features a debut constructor to boot!). On the other hand, I am a proud crossword father who views his crossword children with rose-tinted glasses. So I’m partial to certain aspects of our rejection: We had given a lot of thought to our approach of the theme where the “Grade Inflation” works in both directions, and also to the mechanic of replacing crossed-out clues with a somewhat-related substitute.
Of course, a lot of this has to do with the inherent randomness of crossword submissions. We couldn’t have known we were too late to the Grade Inflation party. But neither could Mallory Montgomery and Zhou Zhang, the constructors of the published puzzle. We both took that risk: to work very hard on something that, unbeknownst to us, might already be a lost cause.
(As an aside: According to the constructors, in July 2024 the New York Times rejected a “Schrödinger” version of the crossword with changed letters working in both directions, an approach which presumably was more similar to the format of our rejected puzzle that I’m partial to. Which just goes to show 1) that we certainly weren’t the inventors of this theme concept, and 2) how often the opinions/tastes of editors and constructors can differ.)
And I’ve benefitted from crossword randomness too. I was proud to debut the entry MAPO TOFU in the New York Times. But it turns out that if my crossword had been published just two months later, I would have been scooped by another puzzle. And even that’s just one situation that I actually know about. In reality, there are probably hundreds of instances where constructors beat someone (or are beaten) to the punch when it comes to a theme.
All of this is to say: It can feel tough sometimes. There are a lot of puzzles getting made, a lot of ideas being created, and a lot of themes being unknowingly duplicated by constructors across the world. It’s a sobering thought, especially when you only have so much free time to work on crosswords, and when the goal you set for yourself (which for me is often publication) feels so defined.
The situation feels especially dire as a beginning constructor. I remembering putting a lot of pressure on my first puzzles, and I think it came from a sense of unease: What if this is my only chance? And what if this is the only decent idea I’ll ever have?
The cure, fortunately and unfortunately, was just making more puzzles. Not only was I getting better at constructing, but I was also increasing my chances from a purely numerical standpoint – entering more raffle tickets into the Great Crossword Lottery. As a result, I also now put less stake into each puzzle I make. There’s another more pragmatic benefit too: The quicker you’re able to make puzzles, the better your chances are to be first-in-line, even if someone else eventually thinks of the same theme.
Final Thoughts
It can be hard to accept this “onto-the-next” mindset, especially if you’re still striving for that first publication. But one mistake I definitely made was taking an “all or nothing” mindset for publication, where the “all” means getting accepted at the New York Times. Even if that’s the ultimate goal, there are other faster ways to 1) improve and 2) get those accomplishment endorphins. Universal Crossword is syndicated to lots of newspapers across the US, and they have quick responses with great editor feedback – they’ll often work with you to get your puzzle to publishing shape in a way that’s rare. The LA Times is also a decent option for submissions (though I’ve had less experience workshopping puzzles there compared to Universal), and I’ve heard good things about USA Today too.
Also, the whole submission process has forced me to consider what I even want out of crossword constructing. And ultimately, while I think there’s a prestige/accomplishment aspect, I mostly just want to know that people are solving my puzzle. (I sort of want them to say something nice about it too, but I’ve accepted that the internet is not always the best place for that.)
So there’s a nice finality in what we’ve done, self-publishing our rejected puzzle for the world instead of letting it waste away in misfit file limbo. I hope you enjoyed the crossword! As for us, we’ve finished feeling sorry for ourselves at last, and are working on the next one.