The strange, the bizarre and the unexpected

[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.

[Naboka]

Lalatan,

Thanks for the invocativenesses closure. It would have festered like so much of the Wordtwist leporsy that consumes my life.

But, one sore heals only to propagate its replacement.

Just finished playing a board that had zero, zeros, zeroes with non-.

Eureka! Nonzero, nonzeros, nonzeroes!!!!!!!

But...!!!!!!

Only nonzero is counted.

Despite the others being in lexic.

Scratch, scratch.

Screen Shot 2022-09-09 at 7.16.07 PM.png

Screen Shot 2022-09-09 at 7.16.26 PM.png

[lalatan]

To answer your question from a previous post: I did keep a digital notebook when I started playing long words. Any words I and others found I typed in a spreadsheet. I suppose that lasted a year or so. As I played more and more games I realized I didn't need the notebook because, to my surprise, I usually remembered the words after I saw them. Depending on the word, it was pretty well cemented in my memory after I saw it 2-4 times.

Then I started saving screenshots of only new words I found to a folder. My intent was to review them every once in a while to keep them in my memory. But, to this day I have not actually gone through the entire folder.

I gave up long ago trying to figure out scoring anomalies like you mentioned. Just in the last 2 weeks I've played about 5 longer words that were negative -nesses. In each case experience has taught me that if the longer negative word (e.g. IRRECOVERABLENESSES for 28 pts) seems to be in more common usage than the shorter, I will always also play the shorter one (RECOVERABLENESSES for 32 pts). It's just a quirk of the game and I accept it as is.

I still get occasionally frustrated when I enter what seems to me to be a valid word and it's rejected. Just to make sure it wasn't a typo, I type or swipe it again. After that I simply look for another. (Of course I have the luxury of more time to do so than you.) There have been times when only choice #3 was accepted. It does give the search an aspect of wildness or uncertainty so I've learned to appreciate that.

To give you closure, I opened my YAWL dictionary document (all 7,500+ pages of it) and searched for invocative-. INVOCATIVENESS(ES) would not be valid. Enjoy the games amigo.

[Naboka]

Here's a headscratcher.

Istanas gets 7 points, istana gets 10. Same with gitanas getting 7 while gitana earns 10.

More letters, less points.

A lot less.

A gitana is a Spanish femal gypsy. So maybe the plural is used more. But... Shouldn't they both be in the same rarity classification?

An Istana is an Indonesian palace. They've got a bunch. Each one is Istana something or other. You'd think the singular would be used more. As in, "let's go visit the Istanas. We'll see Istana A, Istana B, Istana C, Istana D. And then let's get drunk--and caned. What could be more fun?!!!!"

Wordtwist...

sigh.

Screen Shot 2022-09-09 at 9.20.29 AM.png

[Naboka]

fer eximples: just finished a game where john13 found retirednesses.

Good find.

But, when you're typing as fast as you can on other stuff, trying words like that is a big risk.

not that I saw it or tried it,

just saying...

it would be nice to know what will and won't work.

Predictability.

Though, the seredipity probably balances the predicability factor.

What a rush finding a word that you weren't sure whether it would work or not.

sigh

Guess the game has to cater to all types of players

[Naboka]

Some years ago I downloaded a text file of the YAWL (an acronym for Yet Another Word List, all assembled by one man. Remarkable!) when I discovered that WordTwist used it for words 16 letters and longer. It was useful after analyzing a board when I didn't find anything. I'd come up with a possible candidate and do a text search in the document to see if it was valid or not.

As you said, even though my enthusiasm for the game is currently waning, I'm not necessarily completely done with it. I've had such periods before and found a second wind. It's still good for forgetting my chronic pain for a while and keeps the intellect stimulated.

Good to know you aren't seriously thinking of not playing any more. You would be sorely missed.

What works as a long word or not seems to be hit or miss. Played some fairly common medical/scientific terms that got nothing. Played other guessy/weird words that count--like with the -nesses that don't seem to exist in any dictionaries I can find.

(still curious if invocativenesses will work.)

The notebooks fill with words that work. But having notebooks filled with words that didn't work just confuses the issue. They conflate. Would never be able to separate the two. Like twins who disagree constantly.

Sure would like to have a reliable source for studying this stuff.

But, the journey is part of the fun. Adding stuff daily. It's mildly therapeutic. Those eureka moments filled with the satisfaction of dopamine flushing through the brain.

You keep notebooks don't you?

[lalatan]

Some years ago I downloaded a text file of the YAWL (an acronym for Yet Another Word List, all assembled by one man. Remarkable!) when I discovered that WordTwist used it for words 16 letters and longer. It was useful after analyzing a board when I didn't find anything. I'd come up with a possible candidate and do a text search in the document to see if it was valid or not.

As you said, even though my enthusiasm for the game is currently waning, I'm not necessarily completely done with it. I've had such periods before and found a second wind. It's still good for forgetting my chronic pain for a while and keeps the intellect stimulated.

[Naboka]

Not familiar with the YAWL dictionary.

The numbers-drill for speed reading is fascinating. The 5th and 6th digit might be expected. We tend to get the first and last bits in an information stream, but less so the middle.

Keep bringing up Malcolm Gladwell's Blink. A must read.

So much that our mind takes in before we seem aware of it.

It's weird how hidden words just magically and quickly appear if you just trust your ... mind? brain? soul? whatever is the source of metacognition.

But, if we try to logically sort through the stimulus, we tend to miss unbelievable amounts of information.

Understand you losing interest in the game. About reached the endpoint of playing it also.

Started it as a simple exercise for the mind to stave off dementia Became an addictive obsession. Got better than I thought possible. The initial goal was to score 500 points--which seemed unattainable.

But, even in athletics, you hit periods when it all becomes so tedious you just want to quit. All the endless repetition. You either quit or just work through it.

And, as in physical training, you tend to discover new and more useful exercises that achieve better results faster.

I've probably reached the point of strained credibility here, anyway.

Story of my life.

Got the Stages 3 indoor cycle to exercise when COVID closed the gyms. Contacted the trainers on line at their web site, told them my age and the speeds/times/distances I was running--and asked for charts of expectation for different age groups. Trainers tend to be enthusiastic, so they enthusiastically applauded my "accomplishments" with a slight reservation. They suggested I get the bike recalibrated.

Recalibrated?

Guess they thought what I said I was doing wasn't possible at my age. So, I had the technician check the calibration when he came for a service call. His verdict: that I was actually going faster than the computer screen showed because of ??? He fixed it and used his fancy whatever to adjust it to accuracy.

Next day ran my 3rd fastest 12 miler without even realizing it because I wasn't pushing hard. No way the trainers are going to hear that story.

How we measure the world has always been fascinating.

What we believe the limits of those measures to be.

And then to test the limits of those measures...

[lalatan]

Did you factor in the time between games? And the sundry other time-consumers being on the site?

No, I just went by pure playing time. As you say there was undoubtedly a lot of learning time also involved to reach that level of proficiency.

I imagine the top players in every category spend a lot of time studying words. You can't just accidently run up scores or find words--at least not in sufficient quantity to play at the higher levels. The vocabulary has to come with some effort.

And exactly how to arrange that vocabulary into quickly usable patterns.

Incidentally, I tallied my pure playing time and found I have 147 full days of my life playing WordTwist. Of course, for quite some time I've rarely ever played the full 3 minutes so actual playing time would be less.

Thus, the time playing is sometimes only a fraction of the time involved.

Personally, I spend a lot more time analyzing and studying than actually playing.

Would it be fair to assume you do also?

I did all kinds of studies on words that ended with..., started with..., contains... etc. Scanning through the YAWL dictionary. I spent probably too much time on it. Hard to recall and quantify playing time vs. study time since I also used to play a lot more games. I'd say at least 1:1. Recently I haven't been doing it anywhere near what I used to. Truthfully, I'm losing interest in the game. I've reached all my goals and then some. I've collected 62k longest or best word records as of last month. I don't know if I have the desire to reach 75k or 100k anymore. Now it's more fun for me to cobble together a word from prefixes, suffixes and root words I've learned than it is to recall it from a word study I did.

Lately, I've just been opening games and trying to flash recognize the board's patterns. Trying to exercise the old memory cells to make them agile and responsive. Then shutting the game down after 15-30 seconds, not even typing anything.

Of course, if the board seems particularly viable, it gets played to the end. Like having k's, q's, z's and particular vowel blends connected to promising consonants. ai and ei support a lot of useful words. -ate and -ase promise scientific terms.

But, promises are often fragile.

I think that is a good exercise to do. Decades ago I took a speed reading course. One of the exercises flashed a 4 digit number on the TV screen for a fraction of a second. Then you were to write down the number and wait for the next. At the outset I was skeptical it'd work but it did. over a few days the numbers started to have more digits . I got most of the numbers right up to 8 digits. (I got the most errors on 8 digit numbers. He said most often the mistake would be transposition of the 5th and 6th digits. I reviewed my exercises. Every time!) The instructor said it was to help us trust our "visual memory." He said it only takes 1/16 of a second for the image to register on your retina. Kind of blew my mind at the time but I have used it often, even in this game.

[Naboka]

Interesting. I didn't know xyst was a word. Years ago when I played 4x4 I noticed that 2xysters was a prolific player of games. Thereafter I looked up xyster and found it's defined as "a surgical instrument for scraping bone." A somewhat gruesome username I thought but maybe he's a surgeon.

Awhile ago I saw his stats in the 4x4 HoF. At the time, assuming he played every game the full 2 minutes, he had spent 290 24 hr days playing 4x4. Now he's at 334.86 full days, almost a complete year of his life. He has played more games (241k) than anyone else. He's 40 million pts ahead of the next player in the total pts category. I have often wondered, "What on earth would motivate a person to go so hard at it for so long?!"

Did you factor in the time between games? And the sundry other time-consumers being on the site?

Not sure of the gender. But always just assumed the handle was "to exist" codified as a noun. One who exists. The specific person cognizant of being alive and existing. Thought it a clever name.
,
I imagine the top players in every category spend a lot of time studying words. You can't just accidently run up scores or find words--at least not in sufficient quantity to play at the higher levels. The vocabulary has to come with some effort.

And exactly how to arrange that vocabulary into quickly usable patterns.

Especially since a lot of vocablulary on 4x4 is just purely useless except as a vehicle for scoring points.

Thus, the time playing is sometimes only a fraction of the time involved.

Personally, I spend a lot more time analyzing and studying than actually playing.

Would it be fair to assume you do also?

Lately, I've just been opening games and trying to flash recognize the board's patterns. Trying to exercise the old memory cells to make them agile and responsive. Then shutting the game down after 15-30 seconds, not even typing anything.

Of course, if the board seems particularly viable, it gets played to the end. Like having k's, q's, z's and particular vowel blends connected to promising consonants. ai and ei support a lot of useful words. -ate and -ase promise scientific terms.

But, promises are often fragile.