| Player 1 |
|
#player1 Adam_Ginzberg Adam Ginzberg
#player2 JD JD
>Adam_Ginzberg: ?DEITTW -?DEIT +0 0
#note The Cal-Stanford matchup starts with a whimper
>JD: ABEEGLP 8G BEG +12 12
#note ABEL>AELP if I want to play short. Could've also tried BEAGLE but especially after the exchange I prefer playing short here
>Adam_Ginzberg: INRRSTW -INRR +0 0
>JD: AEILNPT H1 TAPELIN. +83 95
#note the night before was my worst night of sleep of the tournament, but was still feeling decent.
>Adam_Ginzberg: ?DENRTT 2G N.TTEReD +70 70
#note the good ol exchange-exchange-bingo sequence
>JD: ADMRSTU J6 MUSTARD +75 170
>Adam_Ginzberg: BOW 1M BOW +30 100
>JD: ?EEILRS 11D REvILE.S +78 248
>Adam_Ginzberg: DEINOSV 4E NOS.DIVE +74 174
>JD: AAAEEGN K10 A.EA +9 257
#note cutting off the hook on MUSTARD was of illusory importance with one S and no blanks remaining, I like GAE at 3M now
>Adam_Ginzberg: DIV L12 VID +30 204
#note a sharp gambit
>JD: AAAEEGN M11 GANE +27 284
#note what the...same rack? also why didn't I see agene here? that would've been a major improvement.
>Adam_Ginzberg: CIRY H11 .YRIC +42 246
>JD: AAEIOOT E1 ATO.IA +12 296
#note forced into making a play like this due to my failure to play agene last time, I'm already down to 70% winning percentage and now I get to gamble.
>Adam_Ginzberg: FOR 15M FOR +27 273
#note doing a great job of creating obnoxious lanes for himself
>JD: EFGOUYZ 1A GYOZ. +84 380
>Adam_Ginzberg: IQ 9F QI +17 290
>JD: EFJMUUU F6 MU +20 400
#note quite the draw, seemed like blocking the X spot would be top priority but quackle says to take the points and play through more tiles with FUME. FUME opens things even more for a turn but may allow me to shut the left side of the board down definitively next turn. I liked creating a J spot with my play, but I supposed I am not that likely to use it. I'm 97% to win either way, supposedly.
>Adam_Ginzberg: ATX 3M TAX +32 322
>JD: EFJLNUU D7 UNFU.L +20 420
#note I really liked getting the bag down to 7 so even if he bingoes next turn I get to out-in-two, quackle seems to prefer FLUE at 12A but I think the tempo factor is important.
>Adam_Ginzberg: CEEHILN 15A ELENCHI. +98 420
#note he wasn't sure if this was good...unfortunately for me I knew it was
>JD: EEIJOOP 8A OPI.E +21 441
#note at the beginning of this endgame I had about two minutes and Adam had 4. That said, I think I should've spotted the gist of my best endgame - playing JOIN saving VEEP for next turn. If I play JOIN then I force a great endgame out of him - HAW at 5L saving KORS to go out, and forcing me to block with WOP leading to a 1 point loss. Instead I failed to anticipate his sequence...
>Adam_Ginzberg: AHKORSW 14A HAW +32 452
#note after winding his time down to the limit, he chooses a sequence that's 3 points below optimal but good enough after I fail to play JOIN
>JD: EJO N10 JO +28 469
#note technically a mistake, should play JEU so as not to give him KORS for the easy out, but...
>Adam_Ginzberg: KORS A1 .ROKS +15 467
#note he puts down kors, starts to doubt whether it takes the S, score-checks with me to see if he has 453 (which I agree to) and then plays GROKS for the tie. In my defense, my scoresheet was messy and it was plausible that I had written a 33 next to HAW (it kind of looks like a 37). Still feel bad in retrospect though.
>Adam_Ginzberg: (E) +2 469
#note and so cal-stanford ends in a deserving tie
|
