> Am I right in thinking it is impossible to solve an Agatha Christie story before the end, because crucial evidence is always withheld til then? i.e. it's not

> Am I right in thinking it is impossible to solve an Agatha Christie story before the end, because crucial evidence is always withheld til then? i.e. it's not a "fair puzzle". I'm not sure about impossible. There was one story, Peril at End House, where I have figured out who the murderer was very early on, in the first few chapters or so. It was a weird feeling of thinking that Poirot was being led astray for a while. That being said, as your other comments say, this is not really a goal for me. If I was serious, I'd lay out the story carefully with pen and paper. But mostly I'd rather just read the story.