| Player 1 |
|
#character-encoding UTF-8
#player1 Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein Josh Sokol-Rubenstein
#player2 Jackson Jackson
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ?EFGHPY H7 GYP +18 18
#note he didnt consider HYP over the board, which does sim a bit better.
>Jackson: EEEIMSS 10F MISE +22 22
#note emes/seme a bit too open. EYE and SEE sim right at the top along with MISE. Looks close.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ?EEFHLQ 11I FEH +23 41
>Jackson: AEEFHSU 12J FEU +22 44
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ?EELQRW -EQW +0 41
#note idk he Josh considered REFLEW. Reflew does not look worth it cause it gives back a lot to me immediately, rather than keeping the board tighter and trying to pounce first. ELR? sims best by a point and a half - ER? and ELRW? and EELRW? all sim close behind. This is one of those leaves where it almost pays to keep fewer tiles in hopes of drawing higher pointers, or keeping those higher pointers immediately, since the bingo is so likely to hit, it is better to hit a heavier score with the higher pointers. Still, ELR? seems to be at the right balance there. Nice choice in a very non-trivial position
>Jackson: AADEHOS G6 HAO +16 60
#note Would normally do ODAH here or HAO/UH to set up the S, but given his range I figured he was too likely to hit the S hook I set up.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ?EILORX 9H .ROLIXEs +82 123
#note PROLIX or REFIX. This is not a word. I held and kind of hated it but was not sure enough to justify the big risk
>Jackson: ADENSST N8 S.NSATED +72 132
#note Potentially no bingoes if I challenge incorrectly and he plays on the O column, so the risk felt huge in challenging. Similarly challenging this off and playing ADS and letting him keep the blank was also not such a fortunate position. Still, if I am sure PROLIXES* is phony I should 100% challenge.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: AEEORTV F1 OVEREAT +81 204
#note OVERTA(M)E plays for 82! thats sick
>Jackson: AIORTTU K2 TUTORIA. +66 198
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ABGJNQU 1A QUANG. +51 255
>Jackson: EINORSU O2 NEUROSI. +80 278
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ABIJLOT O12 BOLA +47 302
#note finally the board is getting closed of scoring enough to where taking out the 15O spot is worth it for Josh. JATO L1 would normally be solid but this and BOTA sim way ahead for defense.
>Jackson: ADIKNRZ A1 .INDAR +18 296
#note Moment of truth. This is almost 25 points worse statically than ADZUKI. While there are only two As left, the QINDARKA setup can have recursive value cause it won't get blocked easily over the next couple turns. The other upside is that if Josh senses the setup, which I expect him to, saving the Z as the kicker can let me play at L1 a lot of the time. This is a big sacrifice immediately but it can totally pay off. ADZUKI would also give him potentially easy scores (maybe I would do KAIZ(E)N instead) and not extract the value from the rack that I want.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: CEIJPTW L1 WIPE +36 338
#note could play EJECT now but this looks better, can hit EJECT with an E draw too
>Jackson: CEGKNOZ M2 ZONE +51 347
#note once again keeping the K for QINDARKA so no ZONK.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: CIIJLTW 11C LICIT +20 358
#note Q likes JILT abit more in a sim, but I like how this puts pressure on me. This can let him block QINDARKA next turn, perhaps.
>Jackson: ?CEGKMN A1 ......Ka +63 410
#note thought about playing G(A)M here. I felt like I was in a really great position. I didnt like getting in a position where I play GAM, he makes a play leaving 2 in the bag, and then QINDARKA could lose to bingoes. I didnt see G(E)CK/CHAO, which might be best. Even though it spenda the K for QINDARKA, EMN? works very well with absorbing the heavy tiles in the pool, and I can probably maintain tempo. I considerd GEN(I)C as well to reach more for the A for QINDARKA, but that can let him block QINDARKA more easily with something like VLO(G), which would also leave 1 in the bag. I am still favoured no matter what, but wanted to find the option with the least downside. QINDARKA felt like it would win the vast majority of the time - looks very hard to get outscored, and the pool isnt great for bingoes, so as long as I can avoid these edge cases I shoul dbe fine.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: AAJLOTW E4 AWL +30 388
#note great play
>Jackson: CDDEGMN D8 CED.NG +26 436
#note really tough position. Will want a Macondo user to check this. with different ranges implied. I am thinking that C(AR)DED is the best play here. I played CEDING because I saw I would win 3/4 if he hit JERBOA, and I figured I would outrun the D4 J bombs. I did not see BLAH unfortunately, and it looks like there are a lot of close calls after CEDING if he hits JOB or JAB. CARDED blocks the J bomb and wins 1/4 when he has JERBOA. It would win for me when JERBOA saves a T or a V, the latter cause he gets V stuck and the former cause I would have MAYVIN, but with ABEJORT he can play BO(L)AR for 20 for the win, setting up JET and saving JET(E) H1. CARDED might be the best play, but it loses to this JERBOA sequence plus bingoes. I figured AWL kept the J most of the time, but not all the time because he could be going for a bingo as well and making this distraction spot. CEDING at least blocks all bingoes, rare as they might be, and only loses to some of these J?B sequences and JERBOA 1/4 of the time. I think CARDED is my gut here at this point.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: ABIJOTY D4 JOB +59 447
>Jackson: DEMRV B10 DEV +19 455
#note second blown endgame of the set. I kept calculating these lines with ?O?E with WIPE? and ELICIT plays or ?A? at 8J. I kept coming up with 1 point losses. I never realized, somehow, that the 5J plays would block N5 AY. If I start with MODE or MORE, saving DEV or REV B10, I will win by 2 or 1 point. Horrible miss, I gotta keep working on tightening the endgame. Just like in the 2nd game, switching the endgame order would win.
>Josh_Sokol-Rubenstein: AITY N5 AY +29 476
>Jackson: MR C1 .RM +10 465
#note MIR for 15.
>Jackson: (IT) +4 469
|
