| Player 1 |
|
#player1 Jason Jason
#player2 Peter_Armstrong Peter Armstrong
>Jason: ?ACIRVV 8G VAV +18 18
#note OK, now we're playing defense. (Of course, the only other time I remember opening with VAV, Dunlop played (A)MBARIEs to answer and bagged me.)
>Peter_Armstrong: HT H7 H.T +6 6
#note Peter was wearing a Materazzi jersey; I made the prerequisite "headbutt" joke before the game.
>Jason: ?CDIMRT 6F MIC +22 40
>Peter_Armstrong: AEINRST 10E ANTSIER +71 77
#note I was a little surprised he didn't double-double here. Figured it was a board-control thing.
>Jason: ?DFIPRT E9 F.D +14 54
>Peter_Armstrong: BFO 12D FOB +24 101
>Jason: ?EIIPRT E1 PIThIER +74 128
#note When he said "hold," I panicked. Crap, what'd I do? I must've mis-designated the blank, transposed letters, been one off and played IMIC* or something. Once I saw my I's were dotted and T's crossed, I wondered why I was still on hold and hoped for a challenge. Why was I on hold? Well, remember how he didn't double-double with RETAINS/E(MIC)? No way, you're thinking? Way. After the game, he said: "Well, I made one mistake and I'm sure you saw it." Of course, after his six-point opener, I saw no scores that indicated a mistake. I looked puzzled enough that he said: "Not double-doubling." Wasn't 100% on EMIC. Wow. P.S. I missed the double-double TRIPwI(R)E here.
>Peter_Armstrong: DEEILOS 13F OILSEED +64 165
>Jason: ?ENORWZ 2D W.Z +35 163
#note OWN at 14E is intriguing. Q likes that and (P)REZ ahead of my play, probably because each threatens the other next turn.
>Peter_Armstrong: ADINNOY K4 NONDAI.Y +98 263
#note His "mistake" ends up turning a mediocre rack into a game-changer.
>Jason: ?EENORS M7 OpENERS +84 247
#note If I was further behind, I could've been really daring and played ENdORSE.
>Peter_Armstrong: ILOPU J2 POILU +23 286
>Jason: AEQSTUW 4H QU..TE +50 297
#note I saw SQUAW. It was almost too good to be true; I talked myself out of it and tried to convince myself that QUINTE was almost as good, since I saved the S. The kind of mistake I can't afford to make in Div. 1.
>Peter_Armstrong: AADERUX 14B REDUX +86 372
#note Yup, his mistake nets him a double-double, my mistake(s) give him 98 and 86. "We're going to have a Clabbers score if this keeps up!" I said. If I play SQUAW, he can play RE(T)AX at 4D for 56, though.
>Jason: AGGSTUW H12 G.UG +24 321
>Peter_Armstrong: AAIO 3C IO.A +24 396
#note That kind of game; where playing off AIO nets him 24.
>Jason: AACGSTW N2 CAT +26 347
#note Really liked the double setup here for my case S.
>Peter_Armstrong: ABKL B3 BALK +27 423
>Jason: AEGHNSW M3 H.W +28 375
#note I agonized over this rack. I almost played WHANGE(R)S*. WASH along row 1 and SWANG, etc. down column O score, but they're losing plays. I was happy Q agreed with me, as this was the only play with a 20+% win rate.
>Peter_Armstrong: J 3M ..J +13 436
#note Now now, playing the J for 13 won't get us to 1000! I was hoping to keep it close enough he couldn't afford to make a play like this, but I couldn't.
>Jason: AEGMNRS 13B AM +18 393
#note Getting toward desperation time. I'm pretty much banking on drawing the I.
>Peter_Armstrong: EILNORT A7 RETINOL +79 515
#note And the exclamation point.
>Jason: EEGNORS 1K GORSE +27 420
#note GENES at 15A is better, but again, if it had 3+ overlaps, I couldn't see it.
>Peter_Armstrong: AAEY 15F YA. +23 538
>Jason: EN 2D ...EN +17 437
#note Just a great, fun game. Eric Z. and Stefan Rau watched part of the post mortem; that was cool, too. Peter seemed like a really nice guy. This is why I play up whenever possible, for games/experiences like this.
>Jason: (AE) +4 441
|
