| Player 1 |
|
#character-encoding UTF-8
#player1 JJB John J. Bulten
#player2 SH Steve Hartsman
>JJB: EGILORS 8D GLORIES +70 70
#note 0:32 [24:28] JJB is off to a flying start against SH.
>SH: ?AEEPRZ J8 .EZ +32 32
#note 2:58 [22:02] (trapezes j1 90 +18.0) SH is also notating his racks; he doesn't quite put together the bingo here but reminds himself to check it later. In the postmortem JJB sees that it was trapeze/s, but SH's blank retention is worth only 18 less in static value due to continuing bingo likelihood.
>JJB: ABENORT H2 REOBTA.N +61 131
#note 0:59 [23:29] JJB recognizes another bingo, cannot play baronet/reboant, and calculates that all four bingos through the I score the same. He plays what he thinks is the safest one. Can you see why this supposition is incorrect?
>SH: ?AEEOPR E4 PARO.EEs +86 118
#note 1:08 [20:54] (parolee 1h 113 +27) The answer is that SH holds the hook tile that would allow a giant premium: parolee or operate plays along with preobtain for 113. Parolees and overleap as quadruples are nothing to sneeze at, but several non-bingo plays in row 1 do even better due to leave. It appears that SH reasons that preobtain must be no good because otherwise JJB would not have allowed it. This oversight is more costly than neglecting trapezes.
>JJB: EINOSUY D2 YOU +20 151
#note 2:31 [20:58] JJB does not draw a third bingo but has positive tiles that allow an easy leave choice. Fine play so far.
>SH: DEGISSW 3G W.DGIES +36 154
#note 1:20 [19:34] SH shows proper form for turnover with a double-S rack and neatly takes the lead while one bingo behind.
>JJB: EFIINST F10 FIT +28 179
#note 3:11 [17:47] (fie f10 28 +.4) JJB holds for a long time, looking for a finites-based bingo with and without the offending wedgies; indeed, the only slot of notifies/tonifies has been blocked. But he is certain he must bite the bullet and releases the play. The main question is what leave to choose, as Quackle prefers INST (fie) by .4, while EIST (fin) is behind his play (fit) by another .4. But fie takes no S.
>SH: AEILSTY K9 LAITY +29 183
#note 1:25 [18:09] (yea 17 24 +9.6) Quackle militates against breaking this rack up when yea/ay/nae and ay/za are available. If you insist on breaking it up you can slot aiyee/ba/ti/ay/nee for 32 with LST worth +10.2.
>JJB: EGINNST 13C TENSING +79 258
#note 0:44 [17:03] JJB breaks out with another easy bingo.
>SH: ELOOSVX 14B VOX +37 220
#note 2:43 [15:26] SH hits back with a well-indicated play. Voxel tempts but is not as good synergy, and the best spot of voxels/ell/zas 32 lags behind because O alone is not at all a positive leave!
>JJB: AEIIOQT C1 QAT +33 291
#note 1:16 [15:47] (qat n1 37 +4) Now SH has returned the favor of opening a big hook that is unclaimed by his opponent, and so JJB misses getting 4 extra for qat/wedgiest.
>SH: DEKLORS 4L DORK +36 256
#note 0:38 [14:48] (kex d12 28 +6.8) Why would this seemingly indicated play rate so far behind the 1-tile dump of kex 28? Because the 6-tile leave DELORS is so bingo-prone as to be worth 28.5 additional. The board is not that closed yet.
>JJB: AEIIJOO N4 .AJ +26 317
#note 4:48 [10:59] (jook o1 45 +30.1; jar 2f 31 +5) Now JJB draws 4 tiles to his 4 vowels and must admit it; SH returns the C from ACO and JJB is left with drek. But if he had taken time to work it out he could have found the one play that ranks 20 static points and 15% win chances ahead of all others, despite its leave: jook 45, winning over 75% of sims. Instead he looks at possibilities for almost 5 minutes before settling. SH blocked the reasonable jiao 22; JJB declines to work out inia h12 15, second best, and doesn't believe that rioja 14 is high enough to count as third, but it's got the better leave than jook. He sacrifices the 5 points available with jar 31 on the hopes that directing jo to his case Os will help hold the line. While raj and jar are close in dynamic valuation, raj and inia have about 60% win odds compared to over 55% for jar, validating some of JJB's judgments.
>SH: CDELSUV O1 DUC. +33 289
#note 0:22 [14:26] (vex d12 26 +7.8) For the second time, SH is holding such bingo-conducive tiles that a single-tile extension of ex has the highest static value; but now the board is much more closed and o1 plays give him the better win odds, around 30%. Quackle also spots that vend h11 9 directs a hook (and possible bingo) to his case S and his U, and there is not too much risk from opponent's potential U because opponent is known to have O and other nonconducive tiles, so this is a ploy to consider based on one's vocabulary estimations.
>JJB: ADEIIOO O6 OIDIA +27 344
#note 0:22 [10:37] Directing a hook worked well for JJB after all! He is keeping even enough with SH's thirties despite weak racks.
>SH: EEILRSV N10 LIVER +24 313
#note 6:35 [7:49] (vex d12 26 +13.3) The minutes tick as SH realizes no bingo will go down, despite 5 sevens and 22 eights. Yet again Quackle recommends fishing due to static leave, by a higher margin, and again its simulation indicates differently: scoring at n10 is needed in hopes of drawing a blank or that second lucrative P. Lever 24 is preferred over liver, because the bag distribution of those vowels is now EEEI.
>JJB: AEHNOPR O13 HEP +31 375
#note 1:52 [8:45] (phoner 1h 75 +42.4; peh 1h 63 +32) And now JJB makes the costliest error of all, blissfully unaware of the unique situation: every 1h play whatsoever, even preobtain 39 itself, ranks in static value above every other play whatsoever, even rayah 2b 38. It happens! JJB has not totally tuned out of preobtain; he even takes the time to question phoner for later testing, but putting both words out at once, if it occurs to him consciously, looks too risky when the lead is acceptable with safe play. All this is simply insufficient consideration. He also doesn't take the time to spot the possibility of rayah, seizing the simple triple; yet hop m13 28 has better leave and static value and is no real loss of points. (Especially compared to phoner 75!)
>SH: AEEHNSU M13 HAE +33 346
#note 0:31 [7:18] SH has a less conducive rack but can capitalize on JJB's overlap in the standard way: he has had only one play below 29 so far (liver 24), yet he still trails due to the bingos. Several plays at m13 keep his win odds around 15%-20%.
>JJB: ?ALNORU 15F ALeURON. +74 449
#note 4:55 [3:50] But SH's play has opened up the one bingo line JJB needs. After taking time to anagram, consider alternatives, and make absolutely sure he has spelled the word right, he proceeds to claim the 103-point lead.
>SH: CENNSUW - +0 346
#note 0:27 [6:51] (aw 7h 18 +24.9) SH is not 100.0% certain of this 5-voweled 8 being spelled right, but Quackle is 100.0% certain that he can't win if it's valid. So he holds the play and judges it's time to challenge as the only way to retain win chances. If he had reviewed the list lately, he could have had more confidence in playing off a W for 18 at aw/we or way, or scoring suq 36.
>JJB: ABEFIMT G6 AF.IT +33 482
#note 2:29 [1:21] Now it's JJB's game to lose, which seems unlikely even as he takes up precious minutes to seal up a pretty parallel play and claim the last two tiles.
>SH: CENNSUW 2B W.. +18 364
#note 0:55 [5:56] (unsaw 5b 15, maybe 2b 28, cento c10 7+6 +1) SH now has one blockable outplay pair, and it's not in JJB's interest to block it: unsaw/yous and cento (through to). This would keep the spread at its current 136. However, scoring and letting JJB go out is not bad either because SH can claim 18 quickly and only lose 19 as JJB goes out, a diff of only 1 point.
>JJB: BEMM N1 EM +19 501
#note 0:54.6 [0:26.4] (mem l7 13, sec a2 18, be i7 18+6 +18) Now JJB runs with quick points in his last minute without realizing that leaving two consonants gives him no additional out. His play now allows SH another chance to go out in two, which is worth 18 in spread.
>SH: CENNSU 5H .UNNS +18 382
#note ~1:56 [~4:00] (sec a2 18, be i7 18, bunn 5h 12+6 +25) SH does not work out the pairing and takes a different quick score, not realizing that this leaves him formally stuck with the C! This time the opportunity cost is 25.
>JJB: BM I7 B. +18 519
#note 0:05.4 [0:21.0] Both players are now on safe calculation footing with only 1-tile plays to find.
>SH: CE 2G E. +7 389
#note ~3:11.0 [0:49.0]
>JJB: M L2 M... +7 526
#note 0:03.0 [0:18.0] (mew g1 8+6 +1) JJB doesn't realize he has been handed one final opportunity point.
>JJB: (C) +6 532
#note SH's racks prove he had a technical unwinnable game, with no bingo racks after the opening and JJB sealing the deal with his fourth bingo. Both players suffered from uncertainty over p/reobtain and from not finding outs in two during the endgame, while JJB also missed a chance for jook 45 and SH could have saved some trouble by not challenging that fourth bingo. Known points available: SH 53, JJB 55. Overall points available: JJB 95.9, SH 133.4.
|
