angie wrote:the score was a bit of an anomaly because I hadn't got the QUIZ...LY word before, but presumably you've got the same word plenty of times before solo
Since we have the list of scores, you can count the numbers if you're interested.
angie wrote:Which raises the question - is it better to be consistently >2000 but <2150 or, for one glorious game, to be >2150 and into 7th place on the all time list?
I'd say the former is better in most respects. It's nice to get a big score every now and again, but if your average is much lower then you know that it's more to do with luck really.
Bob must be rattled! Don't know why though, because as I've tried to emphasise, there's no way I'll be able to match the consistency of the very top players. I'm happy enough with life in the 1800s and, if more chances come to 'luck into' another 2100+, hopefully I'll be able to take them again.
Good presentation with the graph EWQ, though not much in the way of useful info seeing as I've only really started playing many solos in the last 4 months and still maybe 75% of the games I play are with some novice associate (eg. LIAM) who does nothing useful except occasionally foul up the chances of a decent word, no matter how much you shout at them to leave well alone. (eg. when they are determined to take the A out of an -ICALLY hook to make FART).
angie wrote:the games I play are with some novice associate (eg. LIAM) who does nothing useful except occasionally foul up the chances of a decent word,
Yes, the standard noob partner can only be useful by donating some coinage. They should be happy to bask in your glow; they shouldn't feel any compulsion to highlight their obvious ineptitude by trying to contribute. If I play alongside noobs, they are firmly instructed never to touch any letters until they have checked with me first, and preferably, make no suggestion unless their word is at least 6 letters.
Otherwise it's sort of like trying to do a cryptic crossword while a 3-year-old is drawing on your newspaper with crayons.
But Bob was deliberately going for a 39-hack clearance, i.e. playing for a low score, so that isn't as crap as someone who gets a shit score with no excuses.
Of course he needed the K. Otherwise it would have been NUCKLEDUSTERS which isn't a word.
Anyway, have you chaps given any thought to what you're going to turn to once WordUp disappears from your chosen machines? It's already disappeared from most of the Gamesnet machines round here.
Latest iteration of itBox shows WU thankfully still intact.
New candidate for lowest ever score for a JP today - I got £10 for scoring the princely total of 719 (JP at 700) in a previously unvisited Spoons near Central Station
