We think only a record holder can know what you go through to set a record, so we only let people that
have already set world records downvote other people's records.
What can I do?
Go set a record! If you can think of it, you can set a new world record for it.
lol faked! BIGTIME! I've seen this photo floating around with several different names...also...look at the highlighted letters...it makes no since in the order which words were played...a word has to be played off of another word, and to do this that didn't happen
I managed to set up a similar situation on words with friends. Of course, I played both sides. We both took turns setting up the initial board. Then with one side, I swapped letters trying to obtain "O,X,P,B,Z,E" and with the other side I swapped off "X,P,B,Z" if they came my way. It worked! At the end, I was able to play OXYPHENBUTAZONE for a meager 1372 points.
This might possible in a real game. If you manage to play OXY, HEN, and UTA in the correct positions, you may be able to draw "O,P,Z,O,N,E" for a 650 point word. This strategy should be used in combination with diversionary tactics on the opposite end of the board.
@Dan, how about not drawing a line and not even accepting any of it. If, as you say, "There is no clear way to figure out if/when people have set up their plays to get a high score." Then there should be no record.
@Dave Griese: While you're correct that 'oosperm' is the standard pluralization of itself, it appears that 'oosperms' is also technically correct, albeit slightly archaic. The site below cites several uses of it in reputable publications around the turn of the 20th century:
http://www.lexic.us/definition-of/oosperms
Also, Scrabble considers it to be a legal word to play:
http://www.scrabblefinder.com/word/oosperms/
@B Skain/Alexander Shaytoon/Sean O'Driscoll: Where are you all seeing 7 R's / an R used as a blank? I've gone through several times and only count 6, and they all have the '1' in the corner indicating they're non-blanks:
Why do people make such definitive statements about things they are wrong about.
How about this way: I don't think this would be legal in Scrabble, but seems legitimately for WWF. Right down to not getting the two extra points for using a blank for the extra 't'.
This is clearly a fake. "Oosperms" is not a real word. Oosperm is, but it is one of those words which is its own plural. ZOOsperms is, but that word could not have been made without adding a "z" to an already existing word. Nice try.
Hmm.. I stand corrected. "maxes" does not show up on the Scrabble word verification page but seems to show up in Dictionary.com and plays ok in Words With Friends
I can see how this is possible except for the word "maxes" is not a valid word, so this can't be a valid screen shot. However you don't need the word "maxes" to make this work. You could have left the "m" off and just gone with "axes"
CORRECTION: On the same website http://www.lexicalwordfinder.com/ if you scroll all the way to the bottom you will see "Example result: "conceptualizing" for 1472 points. If you click on the word, it will give you an Word with Friends board example, where the word "conceptualizing" is already plugged in. What this guy did, was he plug in the same letter from the example board on Lexical into a game vs himself (player2)"create game > Pass and Play" on his Iphone. Now he still had to hacked the game in some way, in order for him and "player2" to obtain the letters he wanted to make this possible. So, sorry guy, you BUSTED
Ok after seen this, I had to do some research on my own and come out with the truth. There is a website called Lexical Word Finder which most "Word with Friends" cheaters like me use. You place all the letters that are on the board, and the letter on your rack, and click on search, and it gives you the best possible word to plug into the board. So I plug in all the letters just as the one on the picture, and place the letter "O,X,P,E,B,Z,E" on my rack and click on search. For my surprised, The word OXYPHENBUTAZONE did show up as my best possible word, BUT it was worth "267" which I still think is pretty impressive, but as you can see even if it is true, there is no possible way that you can get 1,672 points out of this word. The word is an Inflammatory drug use to treat arthritis and bruises.
There is no way in hell that the total points of this word(s) could be played as one word. If you played OXYPHEN that is possible unless the word is invalid. I have to assume that BUTAZONE has to be played thusly: OXY PHEN BUTA ZONE, If it is played that way. I doubt if the combination of those words played separately and be valid. It is either photo-shopped or the players hacked into the main frame to block the INVALID program. Plus the fact that a word placed on a TW space only counts once and NOT on consecutive plays to adjoin the existing word. It's amusing but is entirely bogus.
Joshua -- see thread below. There is no clear way to figure out if/when people have set up their plays to get a high score. As a result, we accept all submissions, even if they've clearly been set up.
YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY ALL DUMB... THE GAME IS OBVIOUSLY SET UP. HOW CAN YOU PLAY EIGHT LETTERS DOWN IN A SINGLE GO. I'M TALKING ABOUT PRECONCEIVED. LETS SAY THAT PRE WAS ALREADY DOWN HOW CAN YOU ACHIEVED PRECONCEIVED BY ADDING EIGHT LETTERS WHEN THE BOARD ONLY HOLDS SEVEN. WAKE UP PEOPLE IT'S JUST ANOTHER ATTEMPT AT HACKING ONLINE GAMES.
Of course it was set up... and maybe they're not arguing that at all. All they claim to have done here is gotten the single highest word score ever. I guess they did.
What's troubling is that it's these kinds of players who "cheat" when actually playing against others online or on their phones by using word generators. Arguing that is pointless. I KNOW you cheat.
The real test is getting these kinds of players on a physical scrabble board. They'd be absolutely eaten alive without the trial and error allowed in WWF.
All in all, and while this must have taken some time to stage, it's impressive that they were actually able to do it.
Alem, in Words With Friends it is possible to continually exchange letters with your opponent until you have the right ones, so it's quite simple to just keep exchanging tiles until you have it right. No hate here, just a fan of the game and well aware of how it works. :)
All you haters need to stop...even if they were playing on the same phone they still would have to get the correct letters...and who is to say that two people playing online could be sitting next to each other...all you haters need to go find something else to hate like your boring lives...
Has anyone noticed the first two words played in this game? Either this is tongue in cheek and a complete setup, or a series of coincidences combined with sophomoric humour with a rarity of occurrence that is astoundingly monumental.
This looks like it was not played online, that it was played in two player mode. In that case, the board could have been set up -- maybe we should think about adding the criteria that it needs to be between two online players? That seems fair.
He only has 410 points event though it says played for 1670. I don't think he even took the time to exchange letters and set up the board. Looks more like he just photoshopped it to save a few hours manipulating the game. Either way the board was obviously intentionally built. This could be the highest single scoring move possible in WWF but definitely not the highest scoring move played in a WWF game.
Eli, I respectfully disagree. How can we ever draw a line between "set up" plays and "genuine" plays? In an online game like Words With Friends, I don't think it's possible.
I do believe a category like Highest Single Move Score In A Tournament Game Of Scrabble can live alongside this category, but think a creatively conceptualized feat like this one deserves recognition. Congrats, Trevor G.
I think any regular player of Scrabble would agree that it was definitely set up, and I would suggest does not merit a place as a true URDB record. Just go to facebook's Scrabble application and check out the global record holders for highest score for a single word -- it's amazing how many people have managed to play OXYPHENBUTAZONE across three triple word squares for 1778 points.
0
It would be trivial to do this. Just play a game "against a friend" (not a random player), and just keep putting the words on there and swapping tiles until you get the letters you need. You plan the whole board beforehand, knowing the inventory of the letters. Yes, it takes a long time (and a lot of swapping), but it isn't really that hard.
0
agreed. this seems to be a pretty blatant set-up...
Jessica, nice analysis. I'm not sure where I stand on whether it was "set up" or not. Even if that was the motivation, it would take quite a bit of skill and forethought to pull it off. I'm trying to think through how you'd do it.
0
While the screen shot proves this word was indeed played, looking at the way the board is arranged, I would have to assume that this play was set up. First off, this was one of the last plays of the game, so it appears the players spent the entire game setting up the board and saving certain letters. Secondly, this word played off the j,q x and z. Not to mention that the “z” was placed on a triple letter block so it was tripled in the word zag as well as well as the word commercializing. Then because the word commercializing crossed two triple word blocks and one double word block, the “z” alone was worth 570 points. This same set up applies to the “m” which was worth 228 points. And the “q” was set up so it could be doubled as well as the “j” being set up so it could be tripled. Either this is a one in a million stroke of luck, or two players conspired to set it up.
COMMENT ON THIS RECORD
All Comments for this Record Category
Mike Anderson
lol faked! BIGTIME! I've seen this photo floating around with several different names...also...look at the highlighted letters...it makes no since in the order which words were played...a word has to be played off of another word, and to do this that didn't happen
Nona Suomi
Wow, it's just an example in game of the maximum high score for a single play. You guys are all dumbfucks.
Ameer Gittens
This not a real game. Someone would have had to have spelled "oosperms" before the coup de grace.
Chris Cazabon
I have seen this (almost)exact same board, with different player names: so, most likely a fake
http://i.imgur.com/LMgtT.jpg
only a few minor differences but all of the same played words
Jill Sobule
I managed to set up a similar situation on words with friends. Of course, I played both sides. We both took turns setting up the initial board. Then with one side, I swapped letters trying to obtain "O,X,P,B,Z,E" and with the other side I swapped off "X,P,B,Z" if they came my way. It worked! At the end, I was able to play OXYPHENBUTAZONE for a meager 1372 points. This might possible in a real game. If you manage to play OXY, HEN, and UTA in the correct positions, you may be able to draw "O,P,Z,O,N,E" for a 650 point word. This strategy should be used in combination with diversionary tactics on the opposite end of the board.
Cam Eisen
this is fake. look at the board that just got beaten out and check out the vast similarities.
Johnnie Phillips
@Dan, how about not drawing a line and not even accepting any of it. If, as you say, "There is no clear way to figure out if/when people have set up their plays to get a high score." Then there should be no record.
John Public
@Dave Griese: While you're correct that 'oosperm' is the standard pluralization of itself, it appears that 'oosperms' is also technically correct, albeit slightly archaic. The site below cites several uses of it in reputable publications around the turn of the 20th century:
http://www.lexic.us/definition-of/oosperms
Also, Scrabble considers it to be a legal word to play:
http://www.scrabblefinder.com/word/oosperms/
@B Skain/Alexander Shaytoon/Sean O'Driscoll: Where are you all seeing 7 R's / an R used as a blank? I've gone through several times and only count 6, and they all have the '1' in the corner indicating they're non-blanks:
B Shakin
Blasted autocorrect, the extra 'r'!
B Shakin
Why do people make such definitive statements about things they are wrong about.
How about this way: I don't think this would be legal in Scrabble, but seems legitimately for WWF. Right down to not getting the two extra points for using a blank for the extra 't'.
Alexander Shaytoon
Sean O'Drsicoll clearly missed that one of the R's was used with a blank. Also, oosperm means a fertilized ovum; zygote.
Sean O'Driscoll
There are only 6 R's in the words with friends alphabet, here there are 7 on the board
Dave Griese
This is clearly a fake. "Oosperms" is not a real word. Oosperm is, but it is one of those words which is its own plural. ZOOsperms is, but that word could not have been made without adding a "z" to an already existing word. Nice try.
Scott Camp
Hmm.. I stand corrected. "maxes" does not show up on the Scrabble word verification page but seems to show up in Dictionary.com and plays ok in Words With Friends
Scott Camp
I can see how this is possible except for the word "maxes" is not a valid word, so this can't be a valid screen shot. However you don't need the word "maxes" to make this work. You could have left the "m" off and just gone with "axes"
Alex Kelly
@Frank C depending on how much to he took he could have kept swapping letters until he got what he wanted
Patrick Zewatski
Dang, I thought my 101 point word was a lot! >:(
Frank C
CORRECTION: On the same website http://www.lexicalwordfinder.com/ if you scroll all the way to the bottom you will see "Example result: "conceptualizing" for 1472 points. If you click on the word, it will give you an Word with Friends board example, where the word "conceptualizing" is already plugged in. What this guy did, was he plug in the same letter from the example board on Lexical into a game vs himself (player2)"create game > Pass and Play" on his Iphone. Now he still had to hacked the game in some way, in order for him and "player2" to obtain the letters he wanted to make this possible. So, sorry guy, you BUSTED
Frank C
Ok after seen this, I had to do some research on my own and come out with the truth. There is a website called Lexical Word Finder which most "Word with Friends" cheaters like me use. You place all the letters that are on the board, and the letter on your rack, and click on search, and it gives you the best possible word to plug into the board. So I plug in all the letters just as the one on the picture, and place the letter "O,X,P,E,B,Z,E" on my rack and click on search. For my surprised, The word OXYPHENBUTAZONE did show up as my best possible word, BUT it was worth "267" which I still think is pretty impressive, but as you can see even if it is true, there is no possible way that you can get 1,672 points out of this word. The word is an Inflammatory drug use to treat arthritis and bruises.
Mark Anthony
They should be banned from the game for faking this shit lol they probably couldn't even explain the words they used.
Pete A
There is no way in hell that the total points of this word(s) could be played as one word. If you played OXYPHEN that is possible unless the word is invalid. I have to assume that BUTAZONE has to be played thusly: OXY PHEN BUTA ZONE, If it is played that way. I doubt if the combination of those words played separately and be valid. It is either photo-shopped or the players hacked into the main frame to block the INVALID program. Plus the fact that a word placed on a TW space only counts once and NOT on consecutive plays to adjoin the existing word. It's amusing but is entirely bogus.
Dan Rollman
Joshua -- see thread below. There is no clear way to figure out if/when people have set up their plays to get a high score. As a result, we accept all submissions, even if they've clearly been set up.
Joshua Roblee
OBVIOUSLY set up. Look at Player 2's score. Its not really a record if you play both and set it up specifically to get a record. For Shame.
Simon Kirk
Ah
Simon Kirk
So hard to beat. Very impressive.
Jared Reardon
But it's obvious its set up
Jared Reardon
It's real, me and my sistEr tried it today, but I got a higher score then him lol
Jennifer Wark
It's fairly simple. Play "conceive" off of the "C" (oncieve is seven letters), then add the "pre" and the "d" on the end in the next move.
MR RFRYDZ
YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY ALL DUMB... THE GAME IS OBVIOUSLY SET UP. HOW CAN YOU PLAY EIGHT LETTERS DOWN IN A SINGLE GO. I'M TALKING ABOUT PRECONCEIVED. LETS SAY THAT PRE WAS ALREADY DOWN HOW CAN YOU ACHIEVED PRECONCEIVED BY ADDING EIGHT LETTERS WHEN THE BOARD ONLY HOLDS SEVEN. WAKE UP PEOPLE IT'S JUST ANOTHER ATTEMPT AT HACKING ONLINE GAMES.
Captain Woo
Of course it was set up... and maybe they're not arguing that at all. All they claim to have done here is gotten the single highest word score ever. I guess they did. What's troubling is that it's these kinds of players who "cheat" when actually playing against others online or on their phones by using word generators. Arguing that is pointless. I KNOW you cheat.
The real test is getting these kinds of players on a physical scrabble board. They'd be absolutely eaten alive without the trial and error allowed in WWF.
All in all, and while this must have taken some time to stage, it's impressive that they were actually able to do it.
...but it's NOT a real score in real game. :)
Jennifer Wark
Alem, in Words With Friends it is possible to continually exchange letters with your opponent until you have the right ones, so it's quite simple to just keep exchanging tiles until you have it right. No hate here, just a fan of the game and well aware of how it works. :)
Alem Elias
All you haters need to stop...even if they were playing on the same phone they still would have to get the correct letters...and who is to say that two people playing online could be sitting next to each other...all you haters need to go find something else to hate like your boring lives...
Jon Frank
Has anyone noticed the first two words played in this game? Either this is tongue in cheek and a complete setup, or a series of coincidences combined with sophomoric humour with a rarity of occurrence that is astoundingly monumental.
Jennifer Wark
This looks like it was not played online, that it was played in two player mode. In that case, the board could have been set up -- maybe we should think about adding the criteria that it needs to be between two online players? That seems fair.
Farts Dougie
8 out of the 15 letters were already in the perfect spot, of course it was set up. The hindsight stems the tip.
braden nault
Your dumb. look up at the top is says Plater 2 played OXYPHENBUTAZONE for 1670 points. not hurricane -.-
Nick Jones
He only has 410 points event though it says played for 1670. I don't think he even took the time to exchange letters and set up the board. Looks more like he just photoshopped it to save a few hours manipulating the game. Either way the board was obviously intentionally built. This could be the highest single scoring move possible in WWF but definitely not the highest scoring move played in a WWF game.
Dan Rollman
Eli, I respectfully disagree. How can we ever draw a line between "set up" plays and "genuine" plays? In an online game like Words With Friends, I don't think it's possible.
I do believe a category like Highest Single Move Score In A Tournament Game Of Scrabble can live alongside this category, but think a creatively conceptualized feat like this one deserves recognition. Congrats, Trevor G.
Eli Rollman
I think any regular player of Scrabble would agree that it was definitely set up, and I would suggest does not merit a place as a true URDB record. Just go to facebook's Scrabble application and check out the global record holders for highest score for a single word -- it's amazing how many people have managed to play OXYPHENBUTAZONE across three triple word squares for 1778 points.
It would be trivial to do this. Just play a game "against a friend" (not a random player), and just keep putting the words on there and swapping tiles until you get the letters you need. You plan the whole board beforehand, knowing the inventory of the letters. Yes, it takes a long time (and a lot of swapping), but it isn't really that hard.
agreed. this seems to be a pretty blatant set-up...
Corey Henderson
Jessica, nice analysis. I'm not sure where I stand on whether it was "set up" or not. Even if that was the motivation, it would take quite a bit of skill and forethought to pull it off. I'm trying to think through how you'd do it.
While the screen shot proves this word was indeed played, looking at the way the board is arranged, I would have to assume that this play was set up. First off, this was one of the last plays of the game, so it appears the players spent the entire game setting up the board and saving certain letters. Secondly, this word played off the j,q x and z. Not to mention that the “z” was placed on a triple letter block so it was tripled in the word zag as well as well as the word commercializing. Then because the word commercializing crossed two triple word blocks and one double word block, the “z” alone was worth 570 points. This same set up applies to the “m” which was worth 228 points. And the “q” was set up so it could be doubled as well as the “j” being set up so it could be tripled. Either this is a one in a million stroke of luck, or two players conspired to set it up.
Ok that is redonculous