| Player 1 |
|
#player1 Noah Noah
#player2 Ryan_Fischer Ryan Fischer
>Noah: ?AAIOVY 8H IVY +18 18
#note Hm, I guess I underestimated the difference in strength between AIY? and AAO?. Didn't think they'd be that off. Quackle suggests AVO/OVA.
>Ryan_Fischer: ?EGILPS G3 PIGLEtS +73 73
>Noah: ?AACEOU 6C ACAU.OsE +63 81
>Ryan_Fischer: ADEF H1 DEAF +49 122
>Noah: DHINORT D4 OR.HID +26 107
>Ryan_Fischer: IIIII -IIIII +0 122
>Noah: NNRSTXY 10B XYST +43 150
#note Ah, I missed a better place for these tiles.
>Ryan_Fischer: EIU E9 E.UI +11 133
>Noah: CILNNRS F9 LINN +32 182
>Ryan_Fischer: AINW D12 WAIN +28 161
>Noah: CELNRST 14B CR.T +12 194
#note Hm, tough decision here. I thought for awhile. Of the plays worth considering, I mostly thought about COL, CLON, RELICT and CRIT. COL didn't seem good because ERST is generally more balanced (i.e. lower variance) than ENRST, even though it doesn't bingo as much. I didn't like the scoring spot RELICT opened. I also liked blocking the scoring on the bottom right part of the board. It ELNS + worse opponent scores + 6 points seemed better than ERST to me. However, I didn't see the CLIENT option, which scores well, keeps a fine leave and blocks these scoring spots. It's interesting that the bottom left is good for scoring at all -- it doesn't seem outstanding, but the rest of the board just isn't very good for it.
>Ryan_Fischer: EPW C2 PEW +21 182
>Noah: ELLNORS 5I ENROLLS +67 261
>Ryan_Fischer: ENTV O1 VENT. +27 209
>Noah: AAGHIKZ M3 GA.AH +26 287
#note This rack was pretty interesting. I thought about GAZE, HAZE, HAIL, and GALAH. There were good options I didn't see. AGAZE is one, though I didn't like that for the same reason I didn't like GAZE -- usually easy underlaps after those plays for Ryan. A couple other plays I missed: HAZA(N) and (P)HIZ. Also didn't give (Y)AK proper consideration. I played this over GAZE/HAZE because they gave away pretty easy scoring spots which Ryan could play at and leave me nowhere great to go. But wait, this does the same thing. Column L parallels are pretty frequent and hurt about as much as row three parallels.Then again, the IKZ leave is a lot better for scoring than AGIK and AHIK, especially if he doesn't play on row L. HAIL is an option I didn't properly consider, but it is a strong play. The scoring line on row M isn't that easy for him to use, but rows M and L (because I can draw KAZOO) are quite good for me, and I can usually draw a decent scoring play somewhere else if he mucks up that area of the board. None of the good plays here have much effect on the board, so this play is mostly just an exercise in looking at how he'll score next turn and how I'll score next turn. According to a sim, GALAH maximizes this short-term equity, scoring an average 42 for me next turn, while not increasing his score by much compared to other plays.
>Ryan_Fischer: DORT B1 DORT +26 235
>Ryan_Fischer: DORT -- -26 209
>Noah: AEIKOUZ L3 AZ. +49 336
#note Perhaps I should've played ZOA to reduce the score of bingos starting with AEOS. Doesn't help this turn but could be a marginal benefit in the long run.
>Ryan_Fischer: DORT B2 ORT +22 231
>Noah: EIKNORU A1 UKE +33 369
>Ryan_Fischer: AAJR L7 AJAR +24 255
>Noah: EIMMNOR 8A MOM. +24 393
>Ryan_Fischer: OU 1G U.O +4 259
>Noah: BEINRST 2N B. +8 401
>Ryan_Fischer: GIO J8 .OGI +12 271
>Noah: EFINRST 12I SNIFTER +81 482
>Ryan_Fischer: BDDEEOT K9 BOD.ED +35 306
>Noah: EIQ 13H QI +15 497
#note Oh this fits at 11A! I wondered why he didn't try for a Q stick.
>Ryan_Fischer: ET C10 .ET +13 319
>Ryan_Fischer: (E) +2 321
|
