WordleBot is stupid.

[skypilot]

I don't usually pay much attention to it but today I checked it to see its "critique" of my word picks. For my first word I got only the last letter. For my second word I got all of the right letters except the first one and all in the right place. I got the correct word on the third try. According to WordleBot, my first guess, with only one correct letter, was a good one but my second guess, with four correct letters all in the right spot, wasn't "efficient". The "more efficient" word that WordleBot suggested had only ONE of the letters that was in todays word and not even in the right spot. I don't get how that thing thinks.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

1. I like when it tells you "That was a good guess but XXX would be better"

And XXX is the correct answer.
No shit, Sherlock.

[skypilot]

2. OMG

I haven't encountered that yet.

[dgauss]

3. The Wordlebot algorithm seems to consider "skill" and "luck"

I play that and often find the scores a little confounding. I also have some negative feelings about algorithms in general at this point but that is a different issue...

So I'm curious what your "luck" score was. The Wordlebot algorithm seems to demote skill if it considers luck was involved but doesn't always make much sense to me either. Not the most important issue facing us right now but this is the lounge after all

[dgauss]

4. Damn, now I'm thinking about this more.

Ok, let's say you pick a word with your first pick and there are still 100 possibilities.

For your second pick, you could come up with a word that leaves the fewest remaining possibilities. Maybe you come up with the perfect word and after that there are only 5 other possibilities. All other second guesses (other then the actual answer) would still leave more than 5 possibilities. That would be considered skill, or efficiency, you've narrowed it down as much as possible.

But, given what the actual answer is, maybe you don't hit that most efficient answer, and you just happen to hit the second word that leaves only one possibility, that should be considered luck.

That's happened a few times when I've played. I understand that wasn't skill but luck, and yet I see a luck score of something in the 60's or 70's.

Doesn't make sense. If not skill, at least give me credit for luck.

[skypilot]

5. 73 out of 99 for luck...

...and 89 out of 99 for skill, whatever that means.

[dgauss]

7. If your second word got a skill score of 89, that was really good.

Probably narrowed it down to about 4 words, so your luck on try three was that you hit 1 out of 4 possibilities. You would think luck would then be 75 but maybe there is some factoring in of the first and second guess?

In any case, fun game and a good diversion. People that like this might want to give this a try, also fun.

https://www.britannica.com/games/octordle/

[skypilot]

8. What confounds me more...

...than the whole skill vs. luck thing is how the bot thinks that the word it suggested is more efficient than the one I played before I got the answer on the third try. I just don't see it.

Anyway...you should also check out hello wordl.net. You can play as often as you like and you can increase the length of the words up to 11 letters.

[WestMichRad]

6. Screw what the bot says

I’m actually enjoying the 6-letter version, Word Hurdle, more than Wordle. Plus you can play it 2 times a day, for free.
https://wordhurdle.co/
My average score for a full week of Word Hurdle games hovers around 4.0, for what that’s worth.

[skypilot]

9. Check out...

...hellowordl.net. You can play as often as you like and try to guess words with up to 11 letters.

[skypilot]

10. Check out...

...hellowordl.net. You can play as often as you like and try to guess words with up to 11 letters.

[JoseBalow]

11. I can't see WordleBot anymore since I cancelled my NYT subscription

But when I did used to check it, I always found it's analysis lacking.