The strange, the bizarre and the unexpected

[BoggleOtaku]

Since I was just curious about how long the chain could be, I decided ask IGT chat. After trying to correct its response about 15 times (for instance, "championshipshipshipship" is not a valid word), here is what I got:

Apologies for the oversight. Let me provide a valid example that satisfies all the criteria:

chain (5 letters) → chains (6 letters) → chainsaw (8 letters) → chainsaws (9 letters) → chainsawed (11 letters) → disenchanted (12 letters) → disqualified (12 letters) → disqualifiers (13 letters) → undeniably (10 letters) → (no valid word)

In this revised chain, the word lengths grow each time, and each word includes the previous word exactly without any permutations. The chain stops when no valid word can be formed by adding letters to the beginning or end while meeting all the given rules. I apologize for the previous errors, and thank you for your patience.

After this response, I realized it "thought" I specified "chain" as the word to start with. After correcting this and another 10 or so corrections, I got:

Apologies for the error in the previous response. Let's start with the word "disappear" to create a valid chain:

disappear → appearance → appearances → reappearance → reappearances → irreappearances → irreappearances' →

In this revised chain, each word is formed by adding letters either to the beginning or the end of the previous word, adhering to the given rules. This chain consists of 7 words. Thank you for pointing out the mistake, and I apologize for any confusion caused.

[Naboka]

Naboka,

Just got: HARM,PHARM,PHARMA,PHARMACOLOGIC,PHARMACOLOGICAL,PH ARMACOLOGICALLY,NEUROPHARMACOLOGICALLY, for chain of 7. I wonder if 10 is possible.

There are an amazing number in that 4x4. I have noticed, with the new ultra large word count boards added in 5x5, many ultra large word count boards having words with the various alterations found in your board for many different roots even in the same board, such as MORAL-,NORMAL-,IDEAL-,RATIONAL-, etc. I was going to try to find an example to post, but haven't run across one the last couple of days to my surprise.

Congtrats on your last post. I think you can overcome the asymptote to perfection with your persistence. I was wondering why 100 words; is it your personal goal targeting a difficult yet attainable challenge?

Thanks.

And congrats.

Yep. Attainability.

And safety.

With sufficient difficulty to make it worth the effort.

I'd practised typing a while back and was hitting 150 words occaisionally on 4x4. Lasted less than a week, then the inflammation got so bad I had to cut back.

Way back.

I was worried I'd have to stop playing entirely.

Who wants to live with tunnel carpal and that ilk?

Now I just try to set an easy pace in the 100 word range. If I go much over that, the pain makes me pay. (Though lots of games I play end up with less than 80 words so the fingers get a little rest.)

100 is just such a delightful milestone number, so...

Just think how few of us reach a hundred years.

Not to mention, anyone could do a perfect red board if the standard were: a red board. Type one word that's ultrarare and you've done it. Or ten. Or fifty.

I'll probably hit 110 UR's eventually. Find some board with 300-400 ultrarares and hit a groove. Saw some longer ultrarare words on both the above boards that I didn't play to optimize the word count--and reduce the chance for errors. Lot of good that did, but... I've been leaving a lot of words untyped.

But, all this ignores the dozens of games that crash and burn before leaving the runway. It's a lot of failures hiding behind the successes.

Have fun on your word hunts. (Or haunts.) Always a bit more exciting to have personal sidebars to what you're doing.

[BoggleOtaku]

Naboka,

Just got: HARM,PHARM,PHARMA,PHARMACOLOGIC,PHARMACOLOGICAL,PH ARMACOLOGICALLY,NEUROPHARMACOLOGICALLY, for chain of 7. I wonder if 10 is possible.

There are an amazing number in that 4x4. I have noticed, with the new ultra large word count boards added in 5x5, many ultra large word count boards having words with the various alterations found in your board for many different roots even in the same board, such as MORAL-,NORMAL-,IDEAL-,RATIONAL-, etc. I was going to try to find an example to post, but haven't run across one the last couple of days to my surprise.

Congtrats on your last post. I think you can overcome the asymptote to perfection with your persistence. I was wondering why 100 words; is it your personal goal targeting a difficult yet attainable challenge?

[Naboka]

Upped the PR on ultrarare words to 108 twice this morning.

So close to The Red Board. The first had two mistyped words, and two thought-they-were-ultrarares but weren't.

Screen Shot 2023-07-03 at 9.47.20 AM.png

This second one had three mistyped: like rit instead of rait, and spa when the fingers got confused trying for spale.

Screen Shot 2023-07-03 at 10.02.20 AM.png

Think I need to slow it down even more to avoid the mistyping.

Sigh.

But then I risk not hitting a hundred words. Need that hundred words to qualify for The Red Board.

[Naboka]

Thanks for the reply. That's quite a list! I was thinking of root not in a grammar sense, but as a beginning word to which more letters are successively added (to the beginning or to the end or to both) to make new words. In your list, for instance, ANA, ANAL, ANALPHABET, ANALPHABETIC, ANALPHABETICS would be one such chain. I probably forgot to add IONS to my list (I probably scored it), so a chain of 5 looks readily achievable under this interpretation, I guess. As you say, there are different ways to define what is allowable.

BoggleOtaku,

just played this. crazy number of words with capital in the mix. a 16 letter word worth 33.

See how many you can find. Probably around 20 or more. Don't really feel like fleshing it out.

But for anyone who does...

For those providing word examples, please give others a chance and don't provide more than 3.

Screen Shot 2023-06-30 at 4.02.50 PM.png

[BoggleOtaku]

Thanks for the reply. That's quite a list! I was thinking of root not in a grammar sense, but as a beginning word to which more letters are successively added (to the beginning or to the end or to both) to make new words. In your list, for instance, ANA, ANAL, ANALPHABET, ANALPHABETIC, ANALPHABETICS would be one such chain. I probably forgot to add IONS to my list (I probably scored it), so a chain of 5 looks readily achievable under this interpretation, I guess. As you say, there are different ways to define what is allowable.

[Naboka]

I got REAPPROXIMATIONS, APPROXIMATIONS, PROXIMATIONS, OXIMATIONS, the latter as a hail mary. I wonder what is the longest chain of words from a single root is that someone has found.

The exact parameters for "root" might get a little tricky in determining the answer.

I've wondered the same thing. Ran across several chemical terms lately that had a boatload of derivitives. But just wasn't sure what would constitute an allowable word for your inquiry.

Just played a game which had alphabet. Is the root alpha or beta? Or both, for the above question?

Anyhow. I only played analphabet, analphabets and analphabetics.

Wouldn't even have played the analphabet but it had come up lately with elementary school learning and I loved the word.

Playing too many long words is counterproductive to my game style. Too many opportunities for typos and fumbling.

Which meant that even though I saw the likelihood of analphabetic, alphabet, alphabets, alphabetic, alphabetics, alpha; I ignored them. Also saw alphabeting after the game ended.

Probably nowhere near what you're looking for numerically, but ten words isn't bad.

Screen Shot 2023-06-28 at 3.10.48 PM.png

[BoggleOtaku]

I got REAPPROXIMATIONS, APPROXIMATIONS, PROXIMATIONS, OXIMATIONS, the latter as a hail mary. I wonder what is the longest chain of words from a single root is that someone has found.

[2cute]

Ah, yes. Back in the days when I sold my software, one of my customers was from a university. The professor worked in the department of otorhinolaryngology, and that's how the name was entered into our database. Basically it's the ear-nose-throat doctor specialty name.

I've gone to that kind of doctor. For a long time I wore heavy earrings & @ the time I didn't equate wearing them to having more ear infections. Well after a while I found it difficult to wear the earrings because of the ear infections & I stopped. Then I wore lighter earrings. Ever since I only wear lighter earrings, I've stopped having ear infections.

This type of doctor is a specialist, so he/she also charges specialist prices verses going to your primary care physician.

[bwt1213]

Ah, yes. Back in the days when I sold my software, one of my customers was from a university. The professor worked in the department of otorhinolaryngology, and that's how the name was entered into our database. Basically it's the ear-nose-throat doctor specialty name.

[rosedraws]

Lalatan found this one... definitely worth shining a light on! :-D. OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGICAL

[Naboka]

A REALLY long time ago, I proposed that the game not count such boards. If nothing was entered, no game was played. Throw it away. The context was slightly different; I was playing 4x4 and 5x5 as bwt121346 and posting high averages, but a lot of my games timed out with me finding no words. Points per game was awful. Average points per word was really high. And that offended some players deeply. Yeah, I'd played more than 50 games. But only a few dozen of those games included a word. It was as if I'd been cheating.

In response, I stopped playing for average points per word. It hurt. I enjoyed that game-within-a-game. But I didn't want to be perceived as ruining the game for others.

I will ask again, nicely: could the game PLEASE not count games in which no words were entered? Pretty please?

How others perceive what we do is always their problem, not ours. We can't think for them, and letting them think for us just isn't worth allowing. Living according to other people's nonsense will choke the life out of us if we let it. People can be uptight idiots demanding that we play by exclusively their rules rather than our own. And it always seems that their rules benefit them, not us.

You have a point about not counting the games.

Pretty much every player competing for high averages dumps games. Lots and lots of games.

So, what's the difference if admin just didn't include games where nothing was played? Same end result.

Admin probably has far more problems to solve than time allows them. Adding more...?

Life is full of risks. Risk adds dimension to games. Removing too many risks diminishes the game.

Part of the game is managing time. If you're playing for averages, you often run right to the edge of the clock before deciding to dump the game. Those last few seconds are when things can get intense. Intensity has its own rewards. The excitement. The challenge.

Ever notice that in books and movies, the hero never handles the end-of-the-world danger days or months in advance? The clock is always ticking. It's less than a minute. OMG!! The hero just got slammed to the ground by the villain. No way will he make it! The seconds tick away. He manages to land a fatal blow to the villain! It's less than 5 seconds for him to race across the room. He dives. One second left! His extended knife slices through the arming wire! The clock stops! The world is saved!

Hollywood does this for a reason. We like the excitement. The risk.

When I returned to the computer and saw that the game had timed out without anything scored, I burst out laughing. It was hilarious. Still makes me laugh.

I f'd up. Games have consequences. Good and bad.

You try to manage the game elements to have positive consequences. But, without the negative consequences, why even bother? If you never lost, the game would become kind of boring and purposeless. It would be like playing against someone who had absolutely no chance of beating you. Not much satisfaction at all.

The risks involved with expiring clocks has its own rewards.

My vote would be to count the games where nothing got played.

[bwt1213]

Started a game I just wanted to examine.

Doorbell rang, expected guests arrived,

in the excitement, the game never got closed down.

Ooops.

That's got to hurt the old average.

Screen Shot 2022-09-12 at 10.16.17 PM.png

A REALLY long time ago, I proposed that the game not count such boards. If nothing was entered, no game was played. Throw it away. The context was slightly different; I was playing 4x4 and 5x5 as bwt121346 and posting high averages, but a lot of my games timed out with me finding no words. Points per game was awful. Average points per word was really high. And that offended some players deeply. Yeah, I'd played more than 50 games. But only a few dozen of those games included a word. It was as if I'd been cheating.

In response, I stopped playing for average points per word. It hurt. I enjoyed that game-within-a-game. But I didn't want to be perceived as ruining the game for others.

I will ask again, nicely: could the game PLEASE not count games in which no words were entered? Pretty please?

[Naboka]

Started a game I just wanted to examine.

Doorbell rang, expected guests arrived,

in the excitement, the game never got closed down.

Ooops.

That's got to hurt the old average.

Screen Shot 2022-09-12 at 10.16.17 PM.png

[DrPlacebo]

Surprising one, though not high scoring: DOGGO counts.