| Player 1 |
|
#character-encoding UTF-8
#player1 Jason_Vaysberg Jason Vaysberg
#player2 Morris_Greenberg Morris Greenberg
>Jason_Vaysberg: IVY 8H IVY +18 18
>Morris_Greenberg: AANOORS I7 O.A +8 8
>Jason_Vaysberg: EF J6 FE. +19 37
>Morris_Greenberg: AAENORS -AO +0 8
#note Figured this was better than making a play like AA for 9 as his average score will increase by at least that amount the following turn on average.
>Jason_Vaysberg: IIIII -IIIII +0 37
>Morris_Greenberg: AENNPRS H8 .N +4 12
#note Love it when I can average 4 points per turn. Quackle slightly prefers (I)NN by ~0.5%, I liked how this basically requires Jason to open the board.
>Jason_Vaysberg: ?EEENRT K1 RETENEs +69 106
#note Jason was wondering if this is the optimal bingo given my range and the possibility of triple triples. I think if he thinks it is that likely, the 10B RETENEs or TEENERs for 7 fewer points makes sense. TEENERs is best for my actual leave there of AENPRS. The inference there is interesting, because normally playing just the N implies a synergistic 6 tile leave including an N but not blank like AENPRS, but given the closedness of the board without the T for TIVY or the L for OVAL, there is definitely a possibility I am holding the blank there with 2 Ns and 5 non-L,T consonants overall (e.g., NNOPRS? is a rack where IN could have been the play).
>Morris_Greenberg: AENPRST 1E PARTNE.S +83 95
>Jason_Vaysberg: KZ 4J Z.K +32 138
>Morris_Greenberg: BDPRTTT -BDPRTT +0 95
#note Keeping RT or RD are slightly better here, I knew normally these are better leaves but figured on this board where it will be hard to play bingos without S's going for more tiles is stronger to have a better shot at S's, the blank, and the X, or even hefty tiles compatible with the board such as the F, H, M, W, Y.
>Jason_Vaysberg: AHL 2D LAH +31 169
>Morris_Greenberg: ?EEINOT 3K .OE +12 107
#note I only saw ONETImE as a blank 7 here (which was just blocked), I missed EbONITE.
>Jason_Vaysberg: UV D2 .UV +12 181
>Morris_Greenberg: ?AEINOT N1 ENATIOn +70 177
>Jason_Vaysberg: AEGIRST O6 SEAGIRT +80 261
>Morris_Greenberg: HIOORRS 3B HO.RI +27 204
#note I chose this over O1 HO because I thought it complicated the situation more and I disliked that IORRS leave after HO will lead to uninspired plays if I don't bingo next turn. Quackle slightly prefers my play by ~0.5%.
>Jason_Vaysberg: EJU B1 JE.U +28 289
>Morris_Greenberg: ABDLORS N10 BOARD +42 246
>Jason_Vaysberg: AI 1A A.I +30 319
>Morris_Greenberg: LMOPSSY 15L POSY +45 291
#note Interestingly, Quackle prefers MOLYS A4 for 1 more point by ~1.5%. I understood that I have the last 2 S's and didn't have the last tile that plays at A4, but realized it is also much harder to block A4 than 15N, and I thought SEAGIRTS* was valid so this also in my mind preserved the nice but easy-to-overlook 13H bingo lane. If I knew SEAGIRTS* isn't a thing, I am not sure which I would have played.
>Jason_Vaysberg: ACGI H6 AG..IC +13 332
#note For the second time this tournament, I held a play, then released it, and thereafter realized it was invalid but could no longer challenge and audibly say something about it. Josh Sokol was one board over from me so he laughed when he heard me say something again. In this case, I realized I combined REAGINIC and ACINIC, AGINIC* is invalid.
>Morris_Greenberg: ELMNNST 10G N.L +10 301
#note I first laid down MELTS for 37 but thought basically tying the game with the X spots available on a closed board made Jason's life very easy, while this could force him to think about a lot long term (in the situations where he doesn't have A, M, X, there are now 2 lanes that are very difficult to bllock). He was confused by the play because after I put down MELTS and took it off, Jason knew I couldn't have the A on this turn because I would have played MANTLES. Quackle agrees with my choice at around 27% win percentage and MELTS is the second best option at 24.5%.
>Jason_Vaysberg: EW O1 WE +32 364
>Morris_Greenberg: ACEMNST J1 .M +20 321
#note This play further confused Jason. I think it is actually fairly easy to roughly infer what I have (AENST + C, or M most likely), but it is once again tough to block (an L can do it with NILL or a T for TIVY, but otherwise very difficult).
>Jason_Vaysberg: IQU L12 QUI. +30 394
>Morris_Greenberg: ACENOST F7 OCTANES +67 388
>Jason_Vaysberg: DGITW 12B WIDG.T +22 416
#note I was a bit surprised Jason emptied the bag here.
>Morris_Greenberg: BDDEORU C9 DRU.D +18 406
#note I was proud I found this tie, I had under 3 minutes left on my clock when the turn started. I realized BO(W)ED sets up F(I)X for a bunch to lose by 20, BOD(I)ED and UR(D) 14A as a two turn sequence didn't score enough, nor did BODE 13A and URD E5, and the way to maximize my out in 2 without giving up something worse than the existing XI at A4 was to save the E for an unblockable E(QUIP) play. After the game we couldn't find a win for me and I was really proud I found this tie in the moment. Quackle of course humbles me now to point out that if I switched the move order of BO(W)ED and URD E5 to first play URD for 11 points, I win by 1 point! I actually even briefly considered this, but realized after F(I)LMI blocking BO(W)ED, BODE(D) D8 would lose by 2...except I missed that F(I)LMI would create DE(M)OB and win by 1. Crazy cool endgame, I am happy I got the tie but still always cool to see that I can keep improving at it.
>Jason_Vaysberg: FILLMX A4 XI +34 450
>Morris_Greenberg: BEO 11J OBE +26 432
>Morris_Greenberg: (FLLM) +18 450
|
