| Player 1 |
|
#player1 KD Knox Daniel
#player2 JJB John J. Bulten
>KD: ABCN 8G BANC +16 16
#note ~0:30 [~24:30]
>JJB: DFGIILU 9D FLUID +18 18
#note 2:47 [22:13] JJB writes fluiding*, fungili*, ingulf 13, but misses fluidic 25 (8.3 better value), fulgid 24, fuci 17, and for that matter uglified.
>KD: ?ADEMOR E8 c.AMORED +70 86
#note ~3:08 [21:22] Caromed plays quadruple for 25 more.
>JJB: AGGHIIO F14 HO +29 47
#note 5:08 [17:05] JJB takes early points at the expense of later racks, albeit the evaluation difference is slight (agio 4.0 better, and ohia 2.3, which JJB declined among others) and not worth a 5-minute think. KD blocked agio 24.
>KD: DIJN 10H DJIN +19 105
#note 0:46 [20:36] KD hammers away with a relatively solid J dump, potentially a setup, and the board does not yet look like it will become a closure nightmare.
>JJB: AEGGIIS 15E ..GGIE +27 74
#note 1:02 [16:03] JJB demonstrates that occasional extensions are often superior.
>KD: EIINRV L8 VINIER +39 144
#note 1:04 [19:32] Excellent return on the hook, but, to stay in, JJB still only needs his tiles to coalesce before KD's.
>JJB: AAAEIST K9 A.A +12 86
#note 2:10 [13:53] The best play on a triplicate rack is sometimes a duplicate word; far better than vita 21.
>KD: Q I14 Q. +11 155
#note 0:13 [19:19] Decisive clock usage.
>JJB: ACEISTU 8L .ATU +21 107
#note 1:24 [12:29] JJB is playing optimally for a time here, but the bingo is not arising and the rack is about to become and stay poor. The play is still technically an opener.
>KD: ?AEGORS N7 S.ORAGEs +70 225
#note 1:52 [17:27] Given the later trend toward closure, KD might not have preferred escargot 74. He has now pulled thoroughly ahead with JJB's time more than half spent.
>JJB: CEEIINS 12D I.NIC +20 127
#note 2:02 [10:27] JJB is happy to use this I dump but becomes unhappy on realizing he missed the good opener icier 14 (1.4 better). Further, caddie 11 is 1.7 better, and either yields more hope than the actual.
>KD: ERU M12 RUE +17 242
#note 2:04 [15:23] Players begin to demonstrate extreme resistance to the top half of the board.
>JJB: EEFLOSY 10B FLE. +20 147
#note 2:07 [8:20] JJB opens clumsily and momentarily. Yo o11 rates higher by 4.7 but relies even more wholly on pretty much column I only.
>KD: ALOTY B10 .LOATY +24 266
#note ~1:08 [~14:15] Pretty obvious block.
>JJB: BEEOOSY C13 BOO +25 172
#note 2:31 [5:51] JJB is now in the attitude adjustment of seeking only best play rather than winning play. This tops the valuations despite the ticking clock.
>KD: LO 11E .OL +9 275
#note While building rack balance, this play almost baits the chicken game of who can play better on a totally closed board. Lo o11 is 2 better for those tiles.
>JJB: EEISTWY A11 EW +20 192
#note 1:11 [4:40] Another top-rated play but the need to open is critical.
>KD: HM O7 H.M +17 292
#note [10:50]
>JJB: EIKSTUY O13 STY +24 216
#note 1:45 [2:55] Distracted by yuckiest, yukkiest, yeukiest*, JJB in time trouble undervalues the best play of tie 18 (9.9 better) and wastes power, beginning a series of poor choices.
>KD: IT J13 TI. +18 310
#note Now KD makes the very play JJB turned down.
>JJB: EEIKOTU I10 .O +9 225
#note 0:44 [2:11] Here the critical eikon 10 would've opened well, for 12.5 better value. Trading to ET would also have been better. Instead JJB is caught playing chicken.
>KD: P G11 ..P +8 318
#note [~9:25] The better rack is cooler at playing chicken.
>JJB: AEEIKTU J6 TI. +7 232
#note 0:49 [1:22] Trading all was the best value (13.2 diff)! JJB holds out weak hope that etic later will fix everything; but etic now is actually the best non-trade.
>KD: V -4 +0 318
#note KD's trade is again what JJB should have done. KD's actual rack was unrecorded.
>JJB: AEEKPUZ 5I ZEP +34 266
#note 0:33 [0:49] In haste zek (6.0 diff) and apeek are not even considered.
>KD: AERSX L1 RAXES +41 359
#note [~6:00] JJB takes advantage of KD's turn time to plan. KD however makes more points with his power than JJB did.
>JJB: AEKNUVW 1G WANKE. +39 305
#note ~0:39 [~0:10] JJB has tracked almost accurately but can only block up the best spot, not even realizing that it opens up bingos or that the UV leave could be killed. This thereby has a net value of -49 (39-78-10). While knawe, knave, and unawake are tempting, the best play is wave 2k 20 threatening one kanzu out. This indicates KD blocking with render 26, yielding raku 13, doggiest 12+2, or also kat 18, pst 15+4, both being net -7 or 42 better.
>KD: DEENRST 3K E.ED +24 383
#note KD misses two locations for sterned (the better is 78+10), a net of 48 better than his play, which only appears to yield 40 with best followup.
>JJB: UV 3J V.... +16 321
#note Now JJB's best play is obvious, and the embarrassing fact that U is about to be blocked is almost obvious.
>KD: NRST H1 .R +2 385
#note Analyzing this series is instructive. KD finds 25 points net. It appears the best is 7 better, something like at 2 to block, the useful doggier 10, swanker 14, and en/en 4+2.
>JJB: U - +0 321
#note [0:05] Having verified the block, JJB's only remaining duties are to keep hitting the clock immediately and to hope for inadvertent openings from KD. However, JJB finds time and chutzpah to play and retract youdoggie* to break up the tenseness.
>KD: NST 1G ......S +14 399
#note Here KD still has plenty of time to scoop up 2 extra, with swanker 14, et/et 4, ar/ret 5+2.
>JJB: U - +0 321
>KD: NT M3 .N +4 403
>JJB: U - +0 321
#note JJB has never been stuck playless with the U before.
>KD: T H1 ..T +3 406
>KD: (U) +2 408
#note JJB's zero playable bingos are partly due to poor balancing and opening, while KD's combination of bingos, setups, blocks, and time pressure was continuous. The loss of 87 could've been reduced to 45 with the threatening play of wave. JJB describes this game as solitaire-winnable, meaning that the valuation improvements available considering each actual rack as a separable solitaire puzzle (102.3) were sufficient to overcome the deficit (87). Points improvable based on tiles played: JJB 42, KD 88. Points improvable based on values: JJB 102.3. |
