| Player 1 |
|
#character-encoding UTF-8
#player1 David_Weisberg David Weisberg
#player2 Jackson Jackson
>David_Weisberg: AANPRSX -AAN +0 0
>Jackson: AFIIIOR -FIIO +0 0
#note AR is standard, but AIR has best bingo%, and liked going a bit heavier for that given his small exchange.
>David_Weisberg: DEY 8F DYE +14 14
>Jackson: AAILMNR I8 RAILMAN +69 69
>David_Weisberg: ?AAEGRT H1 wATERAG. +77 91
>Jackson: EEFIUUW H13 FEW +34 103
#note just worth playing, very close with FEU too.
>David_Weisberg: DZ 2H .DZ +33 124
>Jackson: ?AEIOUU -IOUU +0 103
#note never saw MIAOU, but decided to exchange over LUAU or AUDIO - I liked keeping both double doubles open, and with AE? my bingoes will score more than after EIO?, on average. Q still prefers playing the 4 vowel plays to exchanging (MIAOU, AUDIO, LOUIE, URAEI), though it prefers exchanging down to AE over the 3 vowel plays. MIAOU is def the play.
>David_Weisberg: AINTV 4C NATIV. +18 142
>Jackson: ?AEINPS 11D PANIc.ES +86 189
>David_Weisberg: BHILLOT 12A THIOL +28 170
>Jackson: AEEINRU K7 UNEA.IER +58 247
>David_Weisberg: BLRW 6F BR.WL +18 188
>Jackson: AGJMOST A8 MAGO. +24 271
#note strongly considered IMAGO 10I here for aggression, setting up JOTAS for next turn, and just winning basically all the non-3x3 scenarios. As I often do, felt better about taking out the freak losses first, and preparing for a slightly harder win otherwise. IMAGO sims best, by about 6 over this. I might do IMAGO against some opponents
>David_Weisberg: ELRSTUY 14K .ULY +14 202
>Jackson: AEJNSTU 3B JUTE +30 301
#note I preferred JUTE to JUNTA to keep the case A, which could be useful for scoring. At the time I don't remember particularly caring whether I took out the C olumn or the L column, but now it seems clear to take out the C column - if I block the L column, its easy to reopen more real estate eastwards, all the while leaving the C column open, whereas JUTE offers a much more definitive block of the lft side of the board, so only the right half can be worked with.
>David_Weisberg: EIOPRST L2 RIPOSTE +75 277
>Jackson: AINOQST 3K Q. +11 312
#note weird turn - obviously this can give back some annoying SOX type plays for a bunch, but this also provides me with a counter to the 15L spot. It sets up my S, but also provides a cool two turn sequence of something like SON to set up QAT, which will be just for me since no As are left. I liked this sequence as a good opportunity to outrun. I wasnt 100% sure of TIAN, which would be another idea to fully block the 15L spot. I also missed NAOI, which looks like a better version of TIAN to avoid duplicating Os. I really don't mind NAOI here at all, the Q is annoying but definitely workable, even with just a QI drop at some point. I think I prefer NAOI to QI here.
>David_Weisberg: DEGIOUX B12 .UG +14 291
#note cool play to set up the E - actual rack here. OX(H)IDE is a bunch of points though, and maybe that's an example of where QI does perform better than NAOI
>Jackson: ABINOST M3 SON +36 348
#note considered AB A14, ISBA, SON here mainly. SON executes the QAT setup, and basically says sure take HUGE or the 15L spot, and I will take/block the other one, while retaining QAT, or just outrun with QAT if that makes the most sense. I think I am up by enough for this plan to usually work - but AB might work out better because it is just less likely he hits the 15L spot - HOOK or HOED are not as likely, and even if they hit, that is not so much more than what he might get with HUGE. Then I can just take a QIS play and coast. The other play I did not see is (S)OB 6L, which just forces the win so much of the time. I think AB and SOB are both better plays than SON.
>David_Weisberg: DEEFIOX 15A FEDEX +59 350
>Jackson: ABCEITV M9 CITAB.E +28 376
#note tough call - considered CAVITY, CITABLE, CAVIL, though not VIABLE. Really want to block 15L here, and can't do it in a way that keeps QAT to outscore. CAVITY was temptying, and might be the call, since all his decent scores will empty the bag, but I can get into a lot of really iffy scenarios where he has a much better rack than me and outscores my out in twos in the endgame. CITABLE felt the most solid, even though the V can run into awkward racks, I go up by enough to outrun a lot of out in twos. The only problem is leaving HEED available, but with only one D, E, H in the pool, it is a pretty specific rack he has to have. Not sure between CAVITY and CITABLE here. Both plays can get into rough situations with N4 setups, but CITABLE does force those to leave him with an out after, whereas CAVITY can lose to those even if they just let him score well at O1.
>David_Weisberg: CEIIKNO 13M .O +9 359
>Jackson: CEHINOV 7C VINE +17 393
>David_Weisberg: DIKOORS O8 SKIDOO +41 400
>Jackson: CHO N5 OCH +17 410
#note horrible endgame by me but gets the job done
>Jackson: (R) +2 412
|
