| Player 1 |
|
#player1 Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein Josh Sokol-Rubenstein
#player2 Jackson Jackson
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: DHMNUUW -DHM +0 0
>Jackson: ACILMOR H4 MICRO +24 24
#note considered MOC after his x3 but I think that's too big a sacrifice
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: EENSUUW 5C HAEMO.DS +78 78
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: EENSUUW -- -78 0
>Jackson: AEGLOSV G8 LOVAGES +65 89
#note so this was a huge mistake on many levels! Firstly I somehow got it in my mind he had DEHIMOS on his rack. LOVAGES/MICROS would give him DEMOLISH, whereas he would get HOMIE after G8 LOVAGES. That's why I played it here, but not only was I wrong and he has ADEHMOS, I average so much after DEMOLISH that it's actually worth it to play 9B lovages even if he has dehimos! that being said the post-HOMIE board is better for me so I think it's closer than the sim says, but the sim still prefers 9B by like 11 points. #strategylarge for being dumb
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ADEHMOS H13 HOM +31 31
>Jackson: BBJORTX G3 JOB +28 117
#note when he didn't play HOMIE I was like oh wait and realized my mistake. I could set up my J with (A)BBOT here, I didn't see that. or B(A)RBOT, that's even better. it looks between that and JOB. with ADES on his rack I think JOB is better, not setting up an S hook and blocking a couple decent lanes. with nothing specified JOB wins over BARBOT by a tiny bit, but wins by 9 when ades is specified
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ADEGLSU 12D GLU. +12 43
#note SUBIDEA is cool here, or maybe VUG
>Jackson: DIRTTUX 11G .UDIT +12 129
#note I didn't see TUR(BI)D, which looks like a better X setup. It's not as clearly an X setup and doesn't open an S hook for him. With ADES I wasn't so concerned but I'm still giving him a couple awesome lanes, and he's taking the spot very often anyways. Even XU/LOT is probably fine here. #findingmedium
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ADF 12J FAD +21 64
>Jackson: LPPRTTX -LPPTX +0 129
#note damn didn't see PROMPT! that looks better here. #findingmedium also not much inspiration on this exchange, I guess it's fine? not much scoring power with PR so I wasn't a huge fan, same w the X
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: AEEFIST E7 FETIA.ES +72 136
>Jackson: DDEIRRT D4 DRIED +28 157
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: BIR 8A BRI.. +24 160
>Jackson: AELNNRT M8 LANTERN +74 231
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ANV I3 VAN +20 180
#note he overdrew and I threw back his E from ENV
>Jackson: EEGIOWX 8L G.OW +30 261
#note maybe GWINE? sets up X? plays underneath for later. also might be decent to just leave the L column cause the bingoes don't hit super hard, GLOW sets up the A hook whichmight be hard to block later, and the W is a high scoring lane. I think GWINE is a bit better #findingsmall
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ?EHNNOY L1 HONEYiN. +86 266
>Jackson: EEEIQSX C3 QI +25 286
#note wow this is awful! I def overestimated EEESX and underestimated EIQ. Us are out, I have QI as backup, and QUIN? plays at the bottom right can hit hard. M1 EXES looks like the play here. I also didn't realize K6 QI is better than this cause I set up EXES next turn for 51!! well worth the 2 point sacrifice, but EXES still kills that in a sim #tacticslarge
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: CILZ 1H ZILC. +57 323
>Jackson: EEEPPSX N5 EXP. +29 315
#note I felt like my S was going to be very powerful here with LANTERNS and other scoring plays, so decided against EXPOSE for 8 more, even though the blank is good to draw. Q prefers EX/BINE by a bit, I score as well with EEPPS next turn. #tacticssmall also prefers EXPOSE, that ends up simming best. I suppose reaching for blanks mainly, hmm.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: EOTU A8 .UTEO +8 331
>Jackson: EEIKPSY 10I EKE +43 358
#note definitely seemed like a play he'd make without a blank or much scoring/S power. This made me want to play KEE(N)S or PESKY/LANTERNS, just to fend off the rare game losing W bingo. However I felt that each play came with some big risks of being outscored - the pool is vowel heavy, and I could get wrecked if he draws the blank and I draw vowels, especially if he can score with the W. KEENS also doesn't score a ton and I will usually make back more than 3 with the S later, even if he hits lanterns now. I'm not positive of this decision but it feels okay, Q agrees that I'm by no means a lock to outrun. With a random rack he seems to hit the W about 6% of the time, so in reality it's probably more like 3 or something. makes me feel better about this decision.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: AAENR B10 ANEAR +22 353
>Jackson: AEIPRSY 15L ESPY +38 396
#note oh damn I thought WAITOUTS* was good so I needed to block that cause he has it 2/7 basically given his ANEAR W-less range. damn.This still seems like the best play, I couldn't find a rack that this loses to based on a quick search, and this blocks WITHOUTS 1/36 of the time
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ?AISTTU 14J STA.Um +28 381
#note I was cloooose to challenging this off, was like 99% sure
>Jackson: AIORW K4 WO +25 421
#note a pretty tactically poor effort on my part. I would like to start getting decisions like QI right now often, and not falling prey to the dumb AUDIT setups.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: IT O5 TI +13 394
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: (AIR) +6 400
|
