I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had some
luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses where the
chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple squeaks at
hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and 175 at at 5. My
max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of missed days; did get to 12
recently.

/dps "nytimes curated edition"

--
The presence of this syntax results from the fact that SQLite is really
a Tcl extension that has escaped into the wild.
<http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html>

On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote

> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple squeaks
> at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and 175 at at
> 5. My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of missed days;
> did get to 12 recently.

I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each result and
occasionally seeing what the scores look like.

What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the last
4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is so long
that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip. I recall that
happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7 possibles).

I suspect I'll eventually get sufficiently annoyed by it that I'll give
it up and stick with crosswords.

HVS wrote:

> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each result and
> occasionally seeing what the scores look like.

I don't keep score at all. I do, however, remember when I got it in one.

--
Bertel, Denmark

HVS hat am 05.03.2024 um 12:46 geschrieben:
> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
>
>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple squeaks
>> at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and 175 at at
>> 5. My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of missed days;
>> did get to 12 recently.
>
> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each result and
> occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
>
> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the last
> 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is so long
> that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip. I recall that
> happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7 possibles).

What about a wrong answer with 3 or 4 of the possible missing letters?
E.g. TaBLe or CLoTH for bower, cower, hower, lower, tower?

On 05/03/2024 12:46, HVS wrote:
> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
>
>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple squeaks
>> at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and 175 at at
>> 5. My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of missed days;
>> did get to 12 recently.
>
> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each result and
> occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
>
> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the last
> 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is so long
> that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip. I recall that
> happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7 possibles).

The trick is to avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time. Make a
list of all the possible letters, and - using an online Scrabble tool -
try and fit as many of them into one (5 letter) word as possible. That
should be your next guess, irrespective of the already guessed letters
(e.g.-atch). You can 'home in' to the correct letter much faster.

>
> I suspect I'll eventually get sufficiently annoyed by it that I'll give
> it up and stick with crosswords.
>

Hang on in there. By my reckoning, NY Times puzzle will run out of words
within 20 - 24 months. Remember their initial list had 2309 words. This
is gradually diminishing by virtue of the fact that the same word is
never used twice.

If you keep a screenshot of each solution (as you say you do), you have
a final trick up your sleeve. When you are faced with a "-atch"
scenario, with say 5-6 possible solutions, you can eliminate some of
these by checking if they have already occurred.

On 05 Mar 2024, Silvano wrote

> HVS hat am 05.03.2024 um 12:46 geschrieben:
>> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
>>
>>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
>>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
>>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple
>>> squeaks at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and
>>> 175 at at 5. My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of
>>> missed days; did get to 12 recently.
>>
>> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each
>> result and occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
>>
>> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the
>> last 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is
>> so long that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip. I
>> recall that happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7
>> possibles).
>
> What about a wrong answer with 3 or 4 of the possible missing
> letters? E.g. TaBLe or CLoTH for bower, cower, hower, lower,
> tower?

I'm not clear on what you mean.

Assuming the upper-case letters are those you've got right -- correct
letters in the correct positions -- then "TaBLe" or "CLoTH" obviously
can't be "-ower" words, as the unknown letters are in the wrong
place.

Here's one I ran out of guesses with, and failed to get (20
February). (In the first two guesses, upper-case letters are correct
but in the wrong position, while in the last four they're correct and
in the right position.)

A-d-i-e-u
H-o-A-r-y
p-A-T-C-H

b-A-T-C-H
w-A-T-C-H
l-A-T-C-H

The answer was "MATCH", but it could equally have been "CATCH".

My point is that having got "patch" in 3, there were 5 possible
answers left, but no way to figure out which of the remaining 2 would
be right -- it was down to pure guesswork.

On 05 Mar 2024, occam wrote

> On 05/03/2024 12:46, HVS wrote:
>> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
>>
>>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
>>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
>>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple
>>> squeaks at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and
>>> 175 at at 5. My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of
>>> missed days; did get to 12 recently.
>>
>> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each
>> result and occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
>>
>> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the
>> last 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is
>> so long that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip. I
>> recall that happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7
>> possibles).
>
> The trick is to avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.

But once you've got four of the letters and they're in the right
position, you can't avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.

> Make a list of all the possible letters, and - using an online
> Scrabble tool - try and fit as many of them into one (5 letter)
> word as possible. That should be your next guess, irrespective of
> the already guessed letters (e.g.-atch). You can 'home in' to the
> correct letter much faster.
>> I suspect I'll eventually get sufficiently annoyed by it that
>> I'll give it up and stick with crosswords.
>
> Hang on in there. By my reckoning, NY Times puzzle will run out of
> words within 20 - 24 months. Remember their initial list had 2309
> words. This is gradually diminishing by virtue of the fact that
> the same word is never used twice.
> If you keep a screenshot of each solution (as you say you do), you
> have a final trick up your sleeve. When you are faced with a
> "-atch" scenario, with say 5-6 possible solutions, you can
> eliminate some of these by checking if they have already occurred.

I think I'll have become bored with it by then....

On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 02:53:22 -0800
Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:

[Wordle]

Today (on my own off-line implementation of Wordle) I got 1 exact after 3
guesses of NORTH AISLE LUCKY
just the E was correct.

The answer was:

[spoiler space]

FEMME

sig applies doubly so.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On 05/03/2024 15:37, HVS wrote:
> On 05 Mar 2024, occam wrote
>
>> On 05/03/2024 12:46, HVS wrote:
>>> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
>>>
>>>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
>>>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
>>>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple
>>>> squeaks at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and
>>>> 175 at at 5. My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of
>>>> missed days; did get to 12 recently.
>>>
>>> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each
>>> result and occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
>>>
>>> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the
>>> last 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is
>>> so long that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip. I
>>> recall that happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7
>>> possibles).
>>
>> The trick is to avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>
> But once you've got four of the letters and they're in the right
> position, you can't avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>

Yes you can. Take your example of '-atch'.

The possible words are: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH

Your next guess: LAMBS
- if any of the letters 'L' 'M' 'B' are lit (green or yellow) you have
arrived at your solution.
- if the letters 'L' 'M' 'B' return as grey, then you have eliminated 3
possibilities 'BATCH', 'MATCH' and 'LATCH' from your list.

Your fifth guess: COWPS (a valid Wordle guess)
- if either of the letters 'W' 'P' is lit (green or yellow) or if 'C'
is green you have solution.

Else, the solution is HATCH

On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 14:37:44 GMT
HVS <office@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote:

> On 05 Mar 2024, occam wrote
>
> > On 05/03/2024 12:46, HVS wrote:
> >> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
> >>
> >>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
> >>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
> >>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple
> >>> squeaks at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and
> >>> 175 at at 5. My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of
> >>> missed days; did get to 12 recently.
> >>
> >> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each
> >> result and occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
> >>
> >> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the
> >> last 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is
> >> so long that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip. I
> >> recall that happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7
> >> possibles).
> >
> > The trick is to avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>
> But once you've got four of the letters and they're in the right
> position, you can't avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>
You need to read the next bit:

> > Make a list of all the possible letters, and - using an online
> > Scrabble tool - try and fit as many of them into one (5 letter)
> > word as possible. That should be your next guess, irrespective of
> > the already guessed letters (e.g.-atch). You can 'home in' to the
> > correct letter much faster.
>
> >> I suspect I'll eventually get sufficiently annoyed by it that
> >> I'll give it up and stick with crosswords.
> >
> > Hang on in there. By my reckoning, NY Times puzzle will run out of
> > words within 20 - 24 months. Remember their initial list had 2309
> > words. This is gradually diminishing by virtue of the fact that
> > the same word is never used twice.
>
> > If you keep a screenshot of each solution (as you say you do), you
> > have a final trick up your sleeve. When you are faced with a
> > "-atch" scenario, with say 5-6 possible solutions, you can
> > eliminate some of these by checking if they have already occurred.
>
> I think I'll have become bored with it by then....
>

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On 05/03/2024 16:41, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 02:53:22 -0800
> Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [Wordle]
>
> Today (on my own off-line implementation of Wordle) I got 1 exact after 3
> guesses of NORTH AISLE LUCKY
> just the E was correct.
>
> The answer was:
>
> [spoiler space]
>

If this is an unspecified off-line implementation of Wordle you play,
why are you so concerned about giving a spoiler alert? No one else
cares, do they?

I played the online (NY) version and the answer was NOT the one you gave.

On 2024-03-05 09:45, occam wrote:
> On 05/03/2024 15:37, HVS wrote:
>> On 05 Mar 2024, occam wrote
>>
>>> On 05/03/2024 12:46, HVS wrote:
>>>> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
>>>>
>>>>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
>>>>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
>>>>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple
>>>>> squeaks at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and
>>>>> 175 at at 5. My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of
>>>>> missed days; did get to 12 recently.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each
>>>> result and occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
>>>>
>>>> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the
>>>> last 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is
>>>> so long that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip. I
>>>> recall that happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7
>>>> possibles).
>>>
>>> The trick is to avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>>
>> But once you've got four of the letters and they're in the right
>> position, you can't avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>>
>
> Yes you can. Take your example of '-atch'.
>
> The possible words are: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>
> Your next guess: LAMBS
> - if any of the letters 'L' 'M' 'B' are lit (green or yellow) you have
> arrived at your solution.
> - if the letters 'L' 'M' 'B' return as grey, then you have eliminated 3
> possibilities 'BATCH', 'MATCH' and 'LATCH' from your list.
>
> Your fifth guess: COWPS (a valid Wordle guess)
> - if either of the letters 'W' 'P' is lit (green or yellow) or if 'C'
> is green you have solution.
>
> Else, the solution is HATCH

Brilliant!

I could have used that recently, when I reset my current streak to 1,
because of a 'four letters correct' scenario.

--
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new
disco­veries, is not “Eureka!” but “That’s funny…”
~ Isaac Asimov

On 05/03/2024 15:41, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 02:53:22 -0800
> Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [Wordle]
>
> Today (on my own off-line implementation of Wordle) I got 1 exact after 3
> guesses of NORTH AISLE LUCKY
> just the E was correct.
>
> The answer was:
>
> [spoiler space]
>
>
>
> sig applies doubly so.

You were not peeved, then?

--
Phil B

HVS hat am 05.03.2024 um 15:25 geschrieben:
> On 05 Mar 2024, Silvano wrote
>
>> HVS hat am 05.03.2024 um 12:46 geschrieben:
>>> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
>>>
>>>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
>>>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
>>>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple
>>>> squeaks at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and
>>>> 175 at at 5. My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of
>>>> missed days; did get to 12 recently.
>>>
>>> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each
>>> result and occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
>>>
>>> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the
>>> last 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is
>>> so long that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip. I
>>> recall that happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7
>>> possibles).
>>
>> What about a wrong answer with 3 or 4 of the possible missing
>> letters? E.g. TaBLe or CLoTH for bower, cower, hower, lower,
>> tower?
>
> I'm not clear on what you mean.
>
> Assuming the upper-case letters are those you've got right -- correct
> letters in the correct positions --

Completely wrong assumption. With TaBLe I get the solution in the next
try if the correct word is tower, bower or lower. With CLoTH I get it if
it is cower, lower, tower or hower.

> Here's one I ran out of guesses with, and failed to get (20
> February). (In the first two guesses, upper-case letters are correct
> but in the wrong position, while in the last four they're correct and
> in the right position.)
>
> A-d-i-e-u
> H-o-A-r-y
> p-A-T-C-H
>
> b-A-T-C-H
> w-A-T-C-H
> l-A-T-C-H
>
> The answer was "MATCH", but it could equally have been "CATCH".
>
> My point is that having got "patch" in 3, there were 5 possible
> answers left, but no way to figure out which of the remaining 2 would
> be right -- it was down to pure guesswork.

And my point is that after p-A-T-C-H I'd try e.g. limbs. Either I get
nothing, then I can exclude batch, latch and match, leaving only catch,
watch and hatch (if a letter can occur twice), or I get one correct
letter (in the right position if it's latch, or in the wrong position if
it's match or batch).
If I get nothing with limbs, I'd follow with "which".
Possible answers:
w-h-i-C-H for CATCH.
W-h-i-C-H for WATCH.
w-h*-i-C-H for HATCH (h* means here correct letter, wrong position).

occam asserted that:
> On 05/03/2024 15:37, HVS wrote:
>> On 05 Mar 2024, occam wrote
>>
>>> On 05/03/2024 12:46, HVS wrote:
>>>> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
>>>>
>>>>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
>>>>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
>>>>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple
>>>>> squeaks at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66. I have 214 at 4, and
>>>>> 175 at at 5. My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of
>>>>> missed days; did get to 12 recently.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each
>>>> result and occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
>>>>
>>>> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the
>>>> last 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is
>>>> so long that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip. I
>>>> recall that happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7
>>>> possibles).
>>>
>>> The trick is to avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>>
>> But once you've got four of the letters and they're in the right
>> position, you can't avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>>
>
> Yes you can. Take your example of '-atch'.
>
> The possible words are: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>
> Your next guess: LAMBS
> - if any of the letters 'L' 'M' 'B' are lit (green or yellow) you have
> arrived at your solution.
> - if the letters 'L' 'M' 'B' return as grey, then you have eliminated 3
> possibilities 'BATCH', 'MATCH' and 'LATCH' from your list.
>
> Your fifth guess: COWPS (a valid Wordle guess)
> - if either of the letters 'W' 'P' is lit (green or yellow) or if 'C'
> is green you have solution.
>
> Else, the solution is HATCH

I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles
don't come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about the
Council on Wage and Price Stability.

/dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"

--
As a colleague once told me about an incoming manager,
"He does very well in a suck-up, kick-down culture."
Bill in Vancouver

On 2024-03-05 16:39, Snidely wrote:
> occam asserted that:
>> On 05/03/2024 15:37, HVS wrote:
>>> On 05 Mar 2024, occam wrote
>>>
>>>> On 05/03/2024 12:46, HVS wrote:
>>>>> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
>>>>>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
>>>>>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple
>>>>>> squeaks at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66.  I have 214 at 4, and
>>>>>> 175 at at 5.  My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of
>>>>>> missed days; did get to 12 recently.
>>>>>
>>>>> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each
>>>>> result and occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
>>>>>
>>>>> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the
>>>>> last 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is
>>>>> so long that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip.  I
>>>>> recall that happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7
>>>>> possibles).
>>>>
>>>> The trick is to avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>>>
>>> But once you've got four of the letters and they're in the right
>>> position, you can't avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>>>
>>
>> Yes you can. Take your example of '-atch'.
>>
>> The possible words are:  BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>>
>> Your next guess:  LAMBS
>> - if any of the letters 'L' 'M' 'B' are lit (green or yellow) you have
>> arrived at your solution.
>> - if the letters 'L' 'M' 'B' return as grey, then you have eliminated 3
>> possibilities 'BATCH', 'MATCH' and 'LATCH' from your list.
>>
>> Your fifth guess: COWPS (a valid Wordle guess)
>> - if either of the letters  'W' 'P' is lit (green or yellow) or if 'C'
>> is green you have solution.
>>
>> Else, the solution is HATCH
>
> I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles don't
> come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about the
> Council on Wage and Price Stability.
>
> /dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"

Well, that's only one way to do it.

How about:

-ATCH possible words: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH

Try CLAMP
solves for CATCH, LATCH, MATCH, and PATCH

Leaves BATCH, HATCH, WATCH

Try SWABS
solves for, BATCH and WATCH
or HATCH, being all that's left.

--
Blame Saint Andreas -- it's all his fault.

Thus spake lar3ryca:
> On 2024-03-05 16:39, Snidely wrote:
>> occam asserted that:
>>> On 05/03/2024 15:37, HVS wrote:
>>>> On 05 Mar 2024, occam wrote
>>>>
>>>>> On 05/03/2024 12:46, HVS wrote:
>>>>>> On 05 Mar 2024, Snidely wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've recently gotten my "made it in 3" score up to 97 (and had
>>>>>>> some luck to get to 20 at 2), but then ... a ran-out-of-guesses
>>>>>>> where the chute was lined with 1 letter-off, and a couple
>>>>>>> squeaks at hung-in-there-at-6 to reach 66.  I have 214 at 4, and
>>>>>>> 175 at at 5.  My max streak is stuck at 16, mainly because of
>>>>>>> missed days; did get to 12 recently.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I haven't kept score other than taking a screen shot of each
>>>>>> result and occasionally seeing what the scores look like.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What you describe, though, is very annoying - when you've got the
>>>>>> last 4 letters in 2 or 3 goes, but the list of possible words is
>>>>>> so long that choosing the right one is just a lucky dip.  I
>>>>>> recall that happening with "-ower" (10 possibles) and "-atch" (7
>>>>>> possibles).
>>>>>
>>>>> The trick is to avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>>>>
>>>> But once you've got four of the letters and they're in the right
>>>> position, you can't avoid guessing the missing letter one at a time.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes you can. Take your example of '-atch'.
>>>
>>> The possible words are:  BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>>>
>>> Your next guess:  LAMBS
>>> - if any of the letters 'L' 'M' 'B' are lit (green or yellow) you have
>>> arrived at your solution.
>>> - if the letters 'L' 'M' 'B' return as grey, then you have eliminated 3
>>> possibilities 'BATCH', 'MATCH' and 'LATCH' from your list.
>>>
>>> Your fifth guess: COWPS (a valid Wordle guess)
>>> - if either of the letters  'W' 'P' is lit (green or yellow) or if 'C'
>>> is green you have solution.
>>>
>>> Else, the solution is HATCH
>>
>> I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles don't
>> come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about the Council
>> on Wage and Price Stability.
>>
>> /dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"
>
> Well, that's only one way to do it.
>
> How about:
>
> -ATCH possible words: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>
> Try CLAMP
> solves for CATCH, LATCH, MATCH, and PATCH
>
> Leaves BATCH, HATCH, WATCH
>
> Try SWABS
> solves for, BATCH and WATCH
> or HATCH, being all that's left.

I'm usually thinking "I got it!" when the slide starts, not that I
still have to weed out bunches of words.

/dps

--
Trust, but verify.

On 06/03/2024 06:30, Snidely wrote:
> Thus spake lar3ryca:

>>>
>>> I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles
>>> don't come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about
>>> the Council on Wage and Price Stability.
>>>
>>> /dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"
>>
>> Well, that's only one way to do it.
>>
>> How about:
>>
>> -ATCH possible words: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>>
>>   Try CLAMP
>>    solves for CATCH, LATCH, MATCH, and PATCH
>>
>> Leaves BATCH, HATCH, WATCH
>>
>>   Try SWABS
>>    solves for,  BATCH and WATCH
>>    or HATCH, being all that's left.

Yes. Better example.

>
> I'm usually thinking "I got it!" when the slide starts, not that I still
> have to weed out bunches of words.
>

Shall we compare scores? I'll shown you mine if you show me yours.

On 2024-03-06 07:37:59 +0000, occam said:

> On 06/03/2024 06:30, Snidely wrote:
>> Thus spake lar3ryca:
>
>>>>
>>>> I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles
>>>> don't come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about
>>>> the Council on Wage and Price Stability.
>>>>
>>>> /dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"
>>>
>>> Well, that's only one way to do it.
>>>
>>> How about:
>>>
>>> -ATCH possible words: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>>>
>>>   Try CLAMP
>>>    solves for CATCH, LATCH, MATCH, and PATCH
>>>
>>> Leaves BATCH, HATCH, WATCH
>>>
>>>   Try SWABS
>>>    solves for,  BATCH and WATCH
>>>    or HATCH, being all that's left.
>
> Yes. Better example.
>
>>
>> I'm usually thinking "I got it!" when the slide starts, not that I still
>> have to weed out bunches of words.
>>
>
> Shall we compare scores? I'll shown you mine if you show me yours.

As little boys say to one another. (They probably say it to little
girls as well, but with less chance of success.)

--
Athel cb

occam scribbled something on Tuesday the 3/5/2024:
> On 06/03/2024 06:30, Snidely wrote:
>> Thus spake lar3ryca:
>
>>>>
>>>> I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles
>>>> don't come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about
>>>> the Council on Wage and Price Stability.
>>>>
>>>> /dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"
>>>
>>> Well, that's only one way to do it.
>>>
>>> How about:
>>>
>>> -ATCH possible words: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>>>
>>>   Try CLAMP
>>>    solves for CATCH, LATCH, MATCH, and PATCH
>>>
>>> Leaves BATCH, HATCH, WATCH
>>>
>>>   Try SWABS
>>>    solves for,  BATCH and WATCH
>>>    or HATCH, being all that's left.
>
> Yes. Better example.
>
>>
>> I'm usually thinking "I got it!" when the slide starts, not that I still
>> have to weed out bunches of words.
>>
>
> Shall we compare scores? I'll shown you mine if you show me yours.

You missed it in the OP?

/dps

--
"This is all very fine, but let us not be carried away be excitement,
but ask calmly, how does this person feel about in in his cooler
moments next day, with six or seven thousand feet of snow and stuff on
top of him?"
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain.

Snidely pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
> occam scribbled something on Tuesday the 3/5/2024:
>> On 06/03/2024 06:30, Snidely wrote:
>>> Thus spake lar3ryca:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles
>>>>> don't come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about
>>>>> the Council on Wage and Price Stability.
>>>>>
>>>>> /dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"
>>>>
>>>> Well, that's only one way to do it.
>>>>
>>>> How about:
>>>>
>>>> -ATCH possible words: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>>>>
>>>>   Try CLAMP
>>>>    solves for CATCH, LATCH, MATCH, and PATCH
>>>>
>>>> Leaves BATCH, HATCH, WATCH
>>>>
>>>>   Try SWABS
>>>>    solves for,  BATCH and WATCH
>>>>    or HATCH, being all that's left.
>>
>> Yes. Better example.
>>
>>>
>>> I'm usually thinking "I got it!" when the slide starts, not that I still
>>> have to weed out bunches of words.
>>>
>>
>> Shall we compare scores? I'll shown you mine if you show me yours.
>
> You missed it in the OP?
>
> /dps

Also, I don't usually use grep or notes to gain an advantage. I hven't
looked at the original javascript files for yonks.

I'm competing with me, not the world.

/dps

--
I have always been glad we weren't killed that night. I do not know
any particular reason, but I have always been glad.
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain

On 06/03/2024 10:32, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2024-03-06 07:37:59 +0000, occam said:
>
>> On 06/03/2024 06:30, Snidely wrote:
>>> Thus spake lar3ryca:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles
>>>>> don't come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about
>>>>> the Council on Wage and Price Stability.
>>>>>
>>>>> /dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"
>>>>
>>>> Well, that's only one way to do it.
>>>>
>>>> How about:
>>>>
>>>> -ATCH possible words: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>>>>
>>>>   Try CLAMP
>>>>    solves for CATCH, LATCH, MATCH, and PATCH
>>>>
>>>> Leaves BATCH, HATCH, WATCH
>>>>
>>>>   Try SWABS
>>>>    solves for,  BATCH and WATCH
>>>>    or HATCH, being all that's left.
>>
>> Yes. Better example.
>>
>>>
>>> I'm usually thinking "I got it!" when the slide starts, not that I still
>>> have to weed out bunches of words.
>>>
>>
>> Shall we compare scores? I'll shown you mine if you show me yours.
>
> As little boys say to one another.

<smile> Yes, that was the idea.

>(They probably say it to little girls
> as well, but with less chance of success.)
>

What do you suppose little girls say to each other? "I can fit my
pencil-case in mine..."

On 06-Mar-24 10:57, Snidely wrote:
> Snidely pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
>> occam  scribbled something on Tuesday the 3/5/2024:
>>> On 06/03/2024 06:30, Snidely wrote:
>>>> Thus spake lar3ryca:
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles
>>>>>> don't come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about
>>>>>> the Council on Wage and Price Stability.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, that's only one way to do it.
>>>>>
>>>>> How about:
>>>>>
>>>>> -ATCH possible words: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>>>>>
>>>>>   Try CLAMP
>>>>>    solves for CATCH, LATCH, MATCH, and PATCH
>>>>>
>>>>> Leaves BATCH, HATCH, WATCH
>>>>>
>>>>>   Try SWABS
>>>>>    solves for,  BATCH and WATCH
>>>>>    or HATCH, being all that's left.
>>>
>>> Yes. Better example.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm usually thinking "I got it!" when the slide starts, not that I
>>>> still
>>>> have to weed out bunches of words.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Shall we compare scores? I'll shown you mine if you show me yours.
>>
>> You missed it in the OP?
>>
>> /dps
>
> Also, I don't usually use grep or notes to gain an advantage.  I hven't
> looked at the original javascript files for yonks.
>
> I'm competing with me, not the world.

Do let us know when there is a clear winner.

--
Sam Plusnet

Sam Plusnet is guilty of <1M3GN.105682$t3Rc.11818@fx06.ams1> as of
3/6/2024 11:48:12 AM
> On 06-Mar-24 10:57, Snidely wrote:
>> Snidely pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
>>> occam  scribbled something on Tuesday the 3/5/2024:
>>>> On 06/03/2024 06:30, Snidely wrote:
>>>>> Thus spake lar3ryca:
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles
>>>>>>> don't come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about
>>>>>>> the Council on Wage and Price Stability.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, that's only one way to do it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -ATCH possible words: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Try CLAMP
>>>>>>    solves for CATCH, LATCH, MATCH, and PATCH
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Leaves BATCH, HATCH, WATCH
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Try SWABS
>>>>>>    solves for,  BATCH and WATCH
>>>>>>    or HATCH, being all that's left.
>>>>
>>>> Yes. Better example.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm usually thinking "I got it!" when the slide starts, not that I still
>>>>> have to weed out bunches of words.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Shall we compare scores? I'll shown you mine if you show me yours.
>>>
>>> You missed it in the OP?
>>>
>>> /dps
>>
>> Also, I don't usually use grep or notes to gain an advantage.  I hven't
>> looked at the original javascript files for yonks.
>>
>> I'm competing with me, not the world.
>
> Do let us know when there is a clear winner.

It's turtles all the way down!

-d

--
Yes, I have had a cucumber soda. Why do you ask?

* Snidely <mn.34507e83aa82cd71.127094@snitoo> :
Wrote on Wed, 06 Mar 2024 18:24:52 -0800:
> Sam Plusnet is guilty of <1M3GN.105682$t3Rc.11818@fx06.ams1> as of
> 3/6/2024 11:48:12 AM
>> On 06-Mar-24 10:57, Snidely wrote:
>>> Snidely pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
>>>> occam? scribbled something on Tuesday the 3/5/2024:
>>>>> On 06/03/2024 06:30, Snidely wrote:
>>>>>> Thus spake lar3ryca:
>>>>>>>> I would never have tried cowps because Copper Oxide Wire Particles
>>>>>>>> don't come up often in my conversations, and I avoid thinking about
>>>>>>>> the Council on Wage and Price Stability.
>>>>>>>> /dps "I don't practice Scottish slang everyday, either"
>>>>>>> Well, that's only one way to do it.
>>>>>>> How about:
>>>>>>> -ATCH possible words: BATCH, CATCH, HATCH, LATCH, MATCH, PATCH, WATCH
>>>>>>> ? Try CLAMP
>>>>>>> ?? solves for CATCH, LATCH, MATCH, and PATCH
>>>>>>> Leaves BATCH, HATCH, WATCH
>>>>>>> ? Try SWABS
>>>>>>> ?? solves for,? BATCH and WATCH
>>>>>>> ?? or HATCH, being all that's left.
>>>>> Yes. Better example.

This strategy really only works when you have grep assist to get an
exhaustive list against a dictionary, which could be deemed cheating.

>>>>>> I'm usually thinking "I got it!" when the slide starts, not that I still
>>>>>> have to weed out bunches of words.
>>>>> Shall we compare scores? I'll shown you mine if you show me yours.

I'm not proud to confess I play compusively, but on a offline version
(like k-m-j), "cheating" most of the time, and using `faketime' to catch
up if i miss a few days in a row. localstorage has this histogram data
of (num-tries . num-games), the num-tries=0 = losses. 8 out of 752

'((1 . 1) (2 . 17) (3 . 194) (4 . 351) (5 . 148) (6 . 33) (0 . 8))

so on a 5 min a day average that's (/ (* 752 5 60) 3600.0) => 63 hours
of wasted time in a little over 2 years. I've recently started using
org-mode timer to time myself, but haven't looked at that data yet.

>>>> You missed it in the OP?
>>> Also, I don't usually use grep or notes to gain an advantage.? I
>>> hven't looked at the original javascript files for yonks.
>>> I'm competing with me, not the world.
>> Do let us know when there is a clear winner.
> It's turtles all the way down!