Wordle (an update)

A week ago, after a few days of playing the online game Wordle, I wrote a blog post and coded a strategy for playing the game.

Unfortunately, almost immediately, my strategy showed its weaknesses!

So, I have adjusted my strategy over the week, and thought I’d write an updated post on what has changed.

First, I will diagnose what went wrong last Saturday. My initial guess was TRACE. Using my algorithm from last week, I knew that it could only be one of seven words: [‘CRACK’, ‘CRAMP’, ‘CRANK’, ‘CRASH’, ‘CRAWL’, ‘CRAZY’, ‘FRANC’]. Unfortunately, any of the first six of these is equally good, or more to the point, equally bad. I essentially was unlucky, and took give guesses to get the right word.

In hindsight, my weakness was limiting myself to using one of the remaining words. Instead, had I guessed SLINK or SNAKY, my results would have most likely confirmed the right answer.

As a result, I updated my algorithm to let my guesses include all the words.

def get_score_counts_for_each_guess(guesswords, words):
outer_results = {}
for guess in guesswords:
results = list(get_scores(guess, words).values())
outer_results[guess] = sum(results)/len(results)
return outer_results

Next, I uncovered a misunderstanding of how the scores are calculated. I had assumed that Wordle will colour a cell yellow whenever the letter appears in the word elsewhere. It turns out that the scoring is more helpful than this.

  • If you guess SEATS and the word is FEAST, it won’t mark both of your S’s as yellow, just the first one.

As a result, I had to recode my score_word function:

def score_word(guess, actual):
outcome = [0,0,0,0,0]
tempword = list(actual)
for i, c in enumerate(guess):
if tempword[i]==c:
for i, c in enumerate(guess):
if c == 0:
if (c in tempword):
tempword[tempword.index(c)] = '0'
return tuple(outcome)

Next, I had a problem on Wednesday, in which the answer was FAVOR, which is an American spelling, so isn’t in my list of words. Interestingly, I did learn that the actual list of accepted words is included in the webpage, but replacing my dictionary with their list seemed a bit like cheating.

In today’s puzzle, I had a dilemma after the second word.

I was lucky enough at this point to know that the word could only be POLAR or MOLAR or SOLAR, each of which I thought was equally likely. And, if I got it wrong, I still wouldn’t know which of the other two it was, meaning I’d have a 33% chance of taking 5 turns to complete the puzzle (or it might even be another word that wasn’t in my dictionary). As a result, I decided to use a word that included a P, an M and an S. Thankfully, it confirmed that S was in my word and M and P weren’t, so I correctly got SOLAR on my fourth turn.

One remaining weakness of my current algorithm is that I judge each of my choices based on how good they are in the current turn. Ideally I would use a recursive strategy, seeing how each word performed in subsequent turns. In fact I tried coding up such an approach, but it took too long to run, for insufficient benefit.

A final comment on the game. I’m still not sure whether my strategy should be to maximise my chance of solving it in a small number of turns, or to minimise my chance of not solving it in 6. At the moment I’m taking the latter, more conservative strategy. But it does mean that I shouldn’t be upset if other people solve a particular day in fewer guesses than me — after all, the people who don’t solve it rarely announce their failure.



Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Guy Lipman

Fascinated by what makes societies and markets work, especially in sustainable energy. http://guylipman.com. Views not necessarily reflect those of my employer.