Author Topic: A new record!  (Read 1908 times)

Morbius

  • Cryptoverbalist
  • *
  • Posts: 561
    • View Profile
A new record!
« on: July 27, 2018, 10:31:34 AM »
By my reckoning, yesterday's standard puzzle smashed the previous record for the number of rosettes achieved.  235 players got rosettes in that game.  I think the previous record was 130-something or thereabouts. 

Tom

  • Word-meister
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
Re: A new record!
« Reply #1 on: July 27, 2018, 12:29:50 PM »
Doh! And I thought I was special!

Tom

  • Word-meister
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
Re: A new record!
« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2018, 12:45:27 PM »
As a matter of interest, what's the lowest?

mkenuk

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 2671
  • Life? Don't talk to me about life.
    • View Profile
Re: A new record!
« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2018, 01:33:57 PM »
It depends if you're talking about the Standard game or all the puzzles.

If you include all games, there were only 7 rosettes on the recent egocentric/ geocentric  10-letter game.

One or more of coercing, concierge, cicerone, coterie, concerti and necrotic managed to elude most solvers. (In my own case, it was the first two).

I think it's unlikely we'll ever see fewer than 7 rosettes in any game because of the easy availability of online anagram solvers.

Jacki

  • Cryptoverbalist
  • *
  • Posts: 964
    • View Profile
Re: A new record!
« Reply #4 on: July 27, 2018, 09:32:36 PM »
But that would be cheating.
Late blooming azaleas tricked by the warmer weather into flowering

anona

  • Paronomaniac
  • ******
  • Posts: 442
    • View Profile
Re: A new record!
« Reply #5 on: July 28, 2018, 12:24:05 AM »
Jacki
I'm honestly not having a go at you, just giving my alternative view. Cheating is a subject that has been raised before and I know what you mean, but ...

I think it depends on whether you think everyone is competing against everyone else. I loathe competition, competitiveness, and couldn't play Chi if in my head that was what it was about. People could play in different ways, I believe: it could be whether they can find all the words by hook or by crook, and then how long it takes them to do that.

Or whether they can meet some personal standard (play only common words; don't have more than 3 common words unfound; find x% in y minutes).

Some people keep lists of words they know are playable. I've considered keeping a list of the real words that I might try to play because I forget Chi does not accept them (and then my hit rate suffers and I kick myself), but I never get round to it. I suppose compensating for my poor memory would be cheating?

Sometimes I check words before playing them, which I suppose could be cheating. For instance, I recently checked "fritten" meaning so small as to be near to useless. "Fritten little thing". I couldn't find it so didn't try to play it. (Please, if anyone else uses it, let me know.)